Choosing blood pressure thresholds to inform pregnancy care in the community: An analysis of cluster trials

Abstract

AbstractObjectiveTo inform digital health design by evaluating diagnostic test properties of antenatal blood pressure (BP) outputs and levels to identify women at risk of adverse outcomes.DesignPlanned secondary analysis of cluster randomised trials.SettingIndia, Pakistan, Mozambique.PopulationWomen with in‐community BP measurements and known pregnancy outcomes.MethodsBlood pressure was defined by its outputs (systolic and/or diastolic, systolic only, diastolic only or mean arterial pressure [calculated]) and level: normotension‐1 (<135/85 mmHg), normotension‐2 (135–139/85–89 mmHg), non‐severe hypertension (140–149/90–99 mmHg; 150–154/100–104 mmHg; 155–159/105–109 mmHg) and severe hypertension (≥160/110 mmHg). Dose–response (adjusted risk ratio [aRR]) and diagnostic test properties (negative [−LR] and positive [+LR] likelihood ratios) were estimated.Main Outcome MeasuresMaternal/perinatal composites of mortality/morbidity.ResultsAmong 21 069 pregnancies, different BP outputs had similar aRR, −LR, and +LR for adverse outcomes. No BP level (even normotension‐1) was associated with low risk (all −LR ≥0.20). Across outcomes, risks rose progressively with higher BP levels above normotension‐1. For each of maternal central nervous system events and stillbirth, BP ≥155/105 mmHg showed at least good diagnostic test performance (+LR ≥5.0) and BP ≥135/85 mmHg at least fair performance, similar to BP ≥140/90 mmHg (+LR 2.0–4.99).ConclusionsIn the community, normal BP values do not provide reassurance about subsequent adverse outcomes. Given the similar performance of BP cut‐offs of 135/85 and 140/90 mmHg for hypertension, and 155/105 and 160/110 mmHg for severe hypertension, digital decision support for women in the community should consider using these lower thresholds.