Literature DB >> 16077263

Accuracy of the pressure scale of sphygmomanometers in clinical use within primary care.

Andrew J Coleman1, Stephen D Steel, Mark Ashworth, Sarah L Vowler, Andrew Shennan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: It is widely recommended that sphygmomanometers are maintained and calibrated regularly to ensure that the pressure scale remains accurate to within the European Standard specification of +/-3 mmHg. In primary care, however, such checks are reported to be only rarely performed. This paper describes a survey of the accuracy of the absolute static pressure scale of aneroid, mercury and automated sphygmomanometers in clinical use in primary care.
METHODS: On-site measurements of sphygmomanometer pressure scale accuracy were carried out in 45 general practices within Lambeth, Southwark and Lewisham. A total of 279 sphygmomanometers from these practices were included in the study. The device pressure scales were calibrated using an accurate electronic reference pressure sensor.
RESULTS: The key finding of this study is that 17.9% (50 out of 279) of all surveyed devices gave errors exceeding the +/-3 mmHg threshold. Of these, 53.2% (33 out of 62) of aneroid devices were found to be reading in error by more than +/-3 mmHg compared with 7.8% (16 out of 217) of the combined population of mercury and automated devices. The difference between these groups is statistically significant (P=0.002). Significant differences in the performance of specific models of aneroid, mercury and automated devices were also identified.
CONCLUSION: A service model for improving the accuracy of blood pressure monitoring in primary care needs to take into account the current proliferation of pressure scale errors in these devices, the lack of uptake of regular checks and the poor quality of some of the devices currently in use.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16077263     DOI: 10.1097/01.mbp.0000168398.87167.c2

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


  10 in total

1.  The extent of inaccurate aneroid sphygmomanometers in a hospital setting.

Authors:  Dimitri A Cozanitis; Christopher J Jones
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2010-07

2.  From mercury sphygmomanometer to electric device on blood pressure measurement: correspondence of Minamata Convention on Mercury.

Authors:  Kei Asayama; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Satoshi Hoshide; Kazuomi Kario; Yusuke Ohya; Hiromi Rakugi; Satoshi Umemura
Journal:  Hypertens Res       Date:  2016-01-28       Impact factor: 3.872

3.  Accuracy of monitors used for blood pressure checks in English retail pharmacies: a cross-sectional observational study.

Authors:  James Hodgkinson; Constantinos Koshiaris; Una Martin; Jonathan Mant; Carl Heneghan; Fd Richard Hobbs; Richard J McManus
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2016-03-29       Impact factor: 5.386

4.  Type and accuracy of sphygmomanometers in primary care: a cross-sectional observational study.

Authors:  Christine A'Court; Richard Stevens; Sarah Sanders; Alison Ward; Richard McManus; Carl Heneghan
Journal:  Br J Gen Pract       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 5.386

5.  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

6.  Challenges in standardization of blood pressure measurement at the population level.

Authors:  Hanna Tolonen; Päivikki Koponen; Androniki Naska; Satu Männistö; Grazyna Broda; Tarja Palosaari; Kari Kuulasmaa
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2015-04-10       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Prospective Register Of patients undergoing repeated OFfice and Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (PROOF-ABPM): protocol for an observational cohort study.

Authors:  James P Sheppard; Una Martin; Paramjit Gill; Richard Stevens; Richard J McManus
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-10-31       Impact factor: 2.692

Review 8.  Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review.

Authors:  Noa Kallioinen; Andrew Hill; Mark S Horswill; Helen E Ward; Marcus O Watson
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.844

9.  Innovations in vital signs measurement for the detection of hypertension and shock in pregnancy.

Authors:  Nicola Vousden; Hannah L Nathan; Andrew H Shennan
Journal:  Reprod Health       Date:  2018-06-22       Impact factor: 3.223

10.  Predicting Out-of-Office Blood Pressure in the Clinic (PROOF-BP): Derivation and Validation of a Tool to Improve the Accuracy of Blood Pressure Measurement in Clinical Practice.

Authors:  James P Sheppard; Richard Stevens; Paramjit Gill; Una Martin; Marshall Godwin; Janet Hanley; Carl Heneghan; F D Richard Hobbs; Jonathan Mant; Brian McKinstry; Martin Myers; David Nunan; Alison Ward; Bryan Williams; Richard J McManus
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 10.190

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.