(891.3) A Potential Link Between Negative Affective Responsivity to Daily Stress and Blood Pressure Reactivity to Acute Stress in College-Aged Adults

Poster Board Number: E377

Ashley Darling (The University of Texas at Arlington), Jacqueline Mogle (The Pennsylvania State University), Paul Fadel (The University of Texas at Arlington), Erika Saunders (Penn State College of Medicine), David Almeida (The Pennsylvania State University), Jody Greaney (The University of Texas at Arlington)

Daily stress, defined as the routine challenges of day-to-day living and the unexpected small hassles that disrupt everyday life, is predictive of future cardiovascular disease (CVD)-related health outcomes; however, the underlying mechanisms remain unclear. Given that heightened blood pressure (BP) reactivity to stress is also purported to increase future CVD risk, we examined a potential link between daily stress and acute stress-induced increases in BP. We hypothesized that increased frequency of daily stressor exposures and greater negative emotional responsiveness to daily stress (i.e., negative affective responsivity) would be positively related to increased BP reactivity to acute stressors in the laboratory setting. Thirty adults (23±5 yrs; 21 female) completed the Daily Inventory of Stressful Events (DISE) interview every day for 8 consecutive days to quantify objective (e.g., frequency) and subjective appraisal characteristics (e.g., emotions) of naturally occurring daily stressors (e.g., stressful event at home/work). On DISE Day 8, mean arterial pressure (MAP; finger photoplethysmography) was measured during two distinct laboratory-based acute stress stimuli: the cold pressor test (CPT; generalized sympathoexcitatory stimulus) and the Stroop Color Word Test (SCWT; cognitive stress stimulus). Daily stress exposure was calculated as the total number of stressors across the 8-day protocol, and negative affective responsivity was calculated as the magnitude of the increase in negative affect on stressor exposure days (at least 1 stressor reported) compared to negative affect on non-stressor exposure days (no stressors reported). BP reactivity was quantified as the peak acute stress-induced increase in MAP to the CPT and SCWT. Participants experienced a total of 3±3 stressors (range: 0-9) over the 8-day interview timeframe. Negative affect was greater on stressor exposure days (0.68±0.50 a.u.) compared to non-exposure days (0.37±0.36 a.u.; plt;0.01). Both the CPT (∆21±7 mmHg) and the SCWT (∆9±6 mmHg) elicited increases in MAP (both plt;0.05). The total number of stressors was not related to the peak increase in MAP during either the CPT (slope=-0.10; r=0.04; p=0.85) or the SCWT (slope=-0.43; r=19; p=0.31). Negative affective responsivity was positively related to the peak increase in MAP during the CPT (slope=12.41; r=0.45; p=0.03) but not the SCWT (slope=3.00; r=0.14, p=0.50). These preliminary data demonstrate that daily stressor exposure by itself is not related to BP reactivity to laboratory stressors in college-aged adults. However, greater negative affective responsivity is associated with greater acute stress-induced increases in BP during the CPT, but not the SCWT, perhaps suggesting that the link between daily stress processes and BP reactivity may be dependent on the stress-responsive neurocircuitry being activated.

NIH R21MH123928 and R00 HL133414