The Journal of the American Dental Association
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


J Am Dent Assoc, Vol 132, No 7, 891-899.
© 2001 American Dental Association

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by SCHAFFER, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by HALBERG, F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by SCHAFFER, E. M.
Right arrow Articles by HALBERG, F.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pharmacology

RESEARCH

Blood pressure outcomes of dental patients screened chronobiologically

A seven-year follow-up



ERWIN M. SCHAFFER, D.D.S., GERMAINE CORNÉLISSEN, Ph.D., NELSON RHODUS, D.D.S., MAX HALHUBER, M.D., YOSHIHIKO WATANABE, M.D., Ph.D. and FRANZ HALBERG, M.D.

Background. This article is a follow-up on a 1998 article in JADA. The blood pressure, or BP, of 23 of 24 normotensive patients was monitored at 15-minute intervals for a total of nine days, in three consecutive sessions of four, two and three days, respectively, separated by a few weeks.

Methods. Twelve patients were reached by phone seven years after the prior chrono-biologically interpreted monitoring to ascertain their cardiovascular status since the initial monitoring.

Results. Only two of the 12 patients reached in follow-up had abnormalities in all three sessions, and only these two patients reported having experienced an adverse vascular event (one a myocardial infarction, the other coronary artery bypass graft surgery). The difference in outcome between the patients with chronobiological abnormality in all three sessions vs. the pool of those with abnormality in only two, one or none of the sessions is statistically significant.

Conclusions. Even a five-day (and sometimes a longer) profile, while greatly preferred to single measurements, may not suffice for a definitive diagnosis of certain patients. Retrospectively, the 864 measurements, on the average, on each person in our study could have served for a recommendation to each person. Chronobiologically interpreted BP and heart rate monitoring for a week or longer as a start detects high-risk states that may be missed by conventional casual measurements that are rarely accompanied by one-day profiles.

Clinical Implications. The dentist has an important opportunity for conveying the importance of monitoring BP and heart rate for a week to detect an abnormal variability, and for implementing this monitoring. Dentists can educate patients regarding the need for screening and for interpreting the results for variability, and contribute to their overall health by referring them to their physicians when treatment is indicated.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright©1995-2001 American Dental Association (ADA).
Reproduction or republication strictly prohibited without prior written permission of ADA.