Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: In certain patients in routine practice, blood pressure (BP) measurements differ substantially from week to week or month to month. Although often assumed to be random, such variability could provide information on underlying pathology or prognosis. In order to be informative, however, visit-to-visit BP variability would have to be neither random (i.e. it should be reproducible over time within individuals) nor artefactual (i.e. it should not be an artefact of the method/timing of measurement, for example). METHODS: We quantified visit-to-visit variability in BP and explored potential confounding factors by analysing repeat measurements obtained every few months during follow-up in two large trials in patients with a transient ischaemic attack (TIA) or minor ischaemic stroke: the UK-TIA Aspirin Trial (effect of aspirin, effect of season and day of the week of measurement) and the European Carotid Surgery Trial (ECST - effect of carotid endarterectomy). By comparing different periods of follow-up, we also determined the reproducibilities of mean and several different measures of variability for both systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP). RESULTS: The mean absolute difference between adjacent SBP readings was 14.7 mm Hg in the UK-TIA Trial and 16.0 mm Hg in ECST. Visit-to-visit variability in both SBP and DBP were independent of the potentially confounding factors studied, but reproducibility of all the variability measures was statistically significantly greater than zero. Reproducibility (intraclass correlation) of standard deviation of SBP was 0.32 (p < 0.0001) in the UK-TIA Trial and 0.18 (p = 0.0007) in ECST. Consequently, classification of patients with high (top quintile) or low (bottom quintile) variability was consistent over time (observed/expected = 2.21, 95% confidence interval 1.71-2.85, p < 0.0001, and 1.65, 1.23-2.21, p = 0.0007, respectively). Reproducibility increased with the number of measurements used to calculate variability, and was independent of any correlation with mean BP. CONCLUSIONS: Visit-to-visit variability in BP in these populations was reproducible, independently of any correlation with mean BP, demonstrating that visit-to-visit intra-individual BP variability is not random.

Original publication




Journal article


Cerebrovasc Dis

Publication Date





331 - 340


Aged, Aspirin, Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Endarterectomy, Carotid, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Ischemic Attack, Transient, Male, Middle Aged, Office Visits, Platelet Aggregation Inhibitors, Predictive Value of Tests, Reproducibility of Results, Seasons, Stroke, Time Factors, Treatment Outcome