Literature DB >> 12488651

Limitations of current validation protocols for home blood pressure monitors for individual patients.

William Gerin1, Amy R Schwartz, Joseph E Schwartz, Thomas G Pickering, Karina W Davidson, Jonathan Bress, Eoin O'Brien, Neil Atkins.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Automatic blood pressure monitoring conducted at home is increasingly used in the diagnosis and management of hypertension. We assessed the adequacy of existing British Hypertension Society (BHS) and Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) validation standards for automatic blood pressure monitoring devices. SUBJECT AND METHODS: A theoretical study and an empirical test are presented to estimate the proportion of persons for whom a blood pressure monitor validated according to existing BHS and AAMI standards would be inaccurate.
RESULTS: The results suggest that a major limitation of both protocols is the lack of attention given to the number of individual patients for whom a monitor may be inaccurate. A blood pressure monitor that meets the AAMI and BHS validation criteria may report blood pressures in error by more than 5 mmHg for more than half of the people.
CONCLUSIONS: A validation standard that does not take account of the person-effects on error will lead to a substantial proportion of persons using self-monitors that are systematically inaccurate for that person. Copyright 2002 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12488651     DOI: 10.1097/00126097-200212000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Blood Press Monit        ISSN: 1359-5237            Impact factor:   1.444


  8 in total

1.  Difference in blood pressure readings with mercury and automated devices: Impact on hypertension prevalence estimates in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania.

Authors:  Arnaud Chiolero; Jean-Pierre Gervasoni; Anne Rwebogora; Marianna Balampama; Fred Paccaud; Pascal Bovet
Journal:  Eur J Epidemiol       Date:  2006-07-07       Impact factor: 8.082

2.  Measuring blood pressure: a call to bare arms?

Authors:  Donald W McKay
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2008-02-26       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Principles and techniques of blood pressure measurement.

Authors:  Gbenga Ogedegbe; Thomas Pickering
Journal:  Cardiol Clin       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 2.213

4.  Call to action on use and reimbursement for home blood pressure monitoring: a joint scientific statement from the American Heart Association, American Society Of Hypertension, and Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association.

Authors:  Thomas G Pickering; Nancy Houston Miller; Gbenga Ogedegbe; Lawrence R Krakoff; Nancy T Artinian; David Goff
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2008-05-22       Impact factor: 10.190

5.  A convenient method to verify the accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure monitors by the auscultatory method: A smartphone-based app.

Authors:  Zhi Zhang; Weichun Xi; Bingjiang Wang; Guang Chu; Fang Wang
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2018-12-20       Impact factor: 3.738

6.  Prevalence of aberrant blood pressure readings across two automated intraoperative blood pressure monitoring systems among patients undergoing caesarean delivery.

Authors:  Robert B Schonberger; Antonio Gonzalez-Fiol; Kristen L Fardelmann; Amit Bardia; George Michel; Feng Dai; Trevor Banack; Aymen Alian
Journal:  Blood Press Monit       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 1.444

7.  Comparison of oscillometric blood pressure measurement by two clinical monitors: Datex Ohmeda GE S/5 and Criticare 8100E nGenuity.

Authors:  Harihar V Hegde; Rajashekar R Mudaraddi; Vijay G Yaliwal; P Raghavendra Rao
Journal:  Indian J Anaesth       Date:  2011-03

8.  Beyond the Evidence of the New Hypertension Guidelines. Blood pressure measurement - is it good enough for accurate diagnosis of hypertension? Time might be in, for a paradigm shift (I).

Authors:  Cornel Pater
Journal:  Curr Control Trials Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2005-04-06
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.