Literature DB >> 11146017

The normal difference in bilateral indirect blood pressure recordings in normotensive individuals.

G R Pesola1, H R Pesola, M J Nelson, R E Westfal.   

Abstract

If there is a significant dichotomy between bilateral blood pressure determinations in both arms, it is often taken as a sign of some type of underlying pathology. We wished to evaluate what the normal variation might be for significant differences between blood pressures in both arms. Significant difference was arbitrarily chosen as a systolic blood pressure value greater than 10 mm Hg. Bilateral indirect blood pressure determinations were obtained in 100 subjects with no known history of hypertension in the sitting position. The blood pressure was obtained by 2 observers, one who recorded the systolic and diastolic blood pressure as announced by the person taking the blood pressures who was blinded to the actual values taken. The coefficient of variation in obtaining the blood pressures in each arm was determined in 5 of the 100 subjects. The age, sex, and handedness of each individual were recorded as demographic variables. The average left and right systolic blood pressures were 112.1 +/- 16.5 and 112.7 +/- 16.3 mm Hg, respectively. The average left and right diastolic pressures were 64.4 +/- 11.6 and 63.5 +/- 9.9 mm Hg, respectively. There was no significant difference between left minus right systolic or diastolic differences (Student's paired t-test). There were no significant differences in systolic or diastolic blood pressure between gender or between right and left handed individuals (non-paired t-test). The average coefficients of variation for right and left arm systolic blood pressures were 5.41% and 5.81%, respectively. Fifteen subjects had differences in systolic blood pressure between both arms exceeding 10 mm Hg (7% to 22%, 95% confidence interval). Differences of more than 10 mm Hg in indirect bilateral blood pressure recordings are frequent in normotensive individuals and probably do not per se indicate any abnormal pathology. In the right clinical situation, differences that are noted should probably be repeated and should be added to the total clinical picture when used to determine whether a pathologic condition is present.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11146017     DOI: 10.1053/ajem.2001.20021

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Emerg Med        ISSN: 0735-6757            Impact factor:   2.469


  6 in total

1.  Prevalence of inter-arm blood pressure difference among clinical out-patients.

Authors:  Balkishan Sharma; Pramila Ramawat
Journal:  Int J Health Sci (Qassim)       Date:  2016-04

2.  Prevalence of optic disc haemorrhages in an elderly UK Caucasian population and possible association with reticular pseudodrusen-the Bridlington Eye Assessment Project (BEAP): a cross-sectional study (2002-2006).

Authors:  Craig Wilde; Ali Poostchi; Rajesh Narendran; Hamish K MacNab; Jonathan G Hillman; Phillip Alexander; Winfried M Amoaku; Stephen A Vernon
Journal:  Eye (Lond)       Date:  2018-11-01       Impact factor: 3.775

3.  A study of the VaSera arterial stiffness device in US patients.

Authors:  George Maliha; Raymond R Townsend
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2017-04-25       Impact factor: 3.738

4.  Inter-arm blood pressure difference and mortality: a cohort study in an asymptomatic primary care population at elevated cardiovascular risk.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Rod S Taylor; Isabella Butcher; Marlene Cw Stewart; Jackie Price; F Gerald R Fowkes; Angela C Shore; John L Campbell
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-04-14       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  The difference in blood pressure readings between arms and survival: primary care cohort study.

Authors:  Christopher E Clark; Rod S Taylor; Angela C Shore; John L Campbell
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2012-03-20

6.  Inter-arm Differences in Simultaneous Blood Pressure Measurements in Ambulatory Patients without Cardiovascular Diseases.

Authors:  Kyoung Bog Kim; Mi Kyeong Oh; Haa Gyoung Kim; Ji Hoon Ki; Soo Hee Lee; Su Min Kim
Journal:  Korean J Fam Med       Date:  2013-03-20
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.