# Comparing blood pressure measurements between sitting in chairs and sitting on the floor

## TL;DR

This study compares blood pressure readings when sitting in a chair versus on the floor and finds no significant difference between the two positions in Korean adults.

## Contribution

The study provides evidence that floor-sitting can be a reliable alternative to chair-sitting for home blood pressure measurements in certain cultures.

## Key findings

- No significant differences were found in systolic or diastolic blood pressure between chair-sitting and floor-sitting positions.
- High agreement between the two positions was observed, with intraclass correlation coefficients above 0.88 for both systolic and diastolic BP.

## Abstract

The current standard approach to measuring home blood pressure (BP) involves taking measurements while sitting in a chair. In cultures where floor sitting is common, including Korea, assessing BP while sitting on the floor would be more feasible. However, there is still a lack of research investigating whether BP measurements obtained while seated in a chair and while sitting on the floor can be regarded as interchangeable. The aim of the study was to evaluate whether there is a difference between BP measurements taken while sitting in a chair and while sitting on the floor in a Korean adult.

Among the participants who visited for evaluation of pulse wave velocity, a total of 116 participants who agreed to participate in the study were randomly selected. All subjects rested for 5 min, and BP measurements were taken at 1-min intervals according to a randomly assigned order of standard method (chair-sitting) and BP in a seated on the floor (floor-sitting).

Of the 116 participants, the median age was 68 (with an interquartile range of 59 to 75), and 82% were men. There were no significant differences in systolic BP (SBP, 129.1 ± 17.8 mmHg in chair-sitting and 130.1 ± 18.9 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.228) and diastolic BP (DBP, 73.9 ± 11.4 mmHg in chair-sitting and 73.7 ± 11.4 mmHg in floor-sitting, P = 0.839) between the two positions. In addition, there was a high level of agreement between BP measurements taken in the two positions (intraclass correlation coefficients: 0.882 for SBP and 0.890 for DBP).

These findings provide important insights into securing the reliability of home BP measurements through the commonly practiced floor-sitting posture in cultures where floor sitting is common. Furthermore, this could serve as substantial evidence for providing specific home BP measurement guidelines to patients who adhere to a floor-sitting lifestyle.

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40885-024-00273-w.