Literature DB >> 18443566

Can validated wrist devices with position sensors replace arm devices for self-home blood pressure monitoring? A randomized crossover trial using ambulatory monitoring as reference.

George S Stergiou1, George R Christodoulakis, Efthimia G Nasothimiou, Periklis P Giovas, Petros G Kalogeropoulos.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Electronic devices that measure blood pressure (BP) at the arm level are regarded as more accurate than wrist devices and are preferred for home BP (HBP) monitoring. Recently, wrist devices with position sensors have been successfully validated using established protocols. This study assessed whether HBP values measured with validated wrist devices are sufficiently reliable to be used for making patient-related decisions in clinical practice.
METHODS: This randomized crossover study compared HBP measurements taken using validated wrist devices (wrist-HBP, Omron R7 with position sensor) with those taken using arm devices (arm-HBP, Omron 705IT), and also with measurements of awake ambulatory BP (ABP, SpaceLabs), in 79 subjects (36 men and 43 women) with hypertension. The mean age of the study population was 56.7 +/- 11.8 years, and 33 of the subjects were not under treatment for hypertension.
RESULTS: The average arm-HBP was higher than the average wrist-HBP (mean difference, systolic 5.2 +/- 9.1 mm Hg, P < 0.001, and diastolic 2.2 +/- 6.7, P < 0.01). Twenty-seven subjects (34%) had a > or =10 mm Hg difference between systolic wrist-HBP and arm-HBP and twelve subjects (15%) showed similar levels of disparity in diastolic HBP readings. Strong correlations were found between arm-HBP and wrist-HBP (r 0.74/0.74, systolic/diastolic, P < 0.0001). However, ABP was more strongly correlated with arm-HBP (r 0.73/0.76) than with wrist-HBP (0.55/0.69). The wrist-arm HBP difference was associated with systolic ABP (r 0.34) and pulse pressure (r 0.29), but not with diastolic ABP, sex, age, arm circumference, and wrist circumference.
CONCLUSIONS: There might be important differences in HBP measured using validated wrist devices with position sensor vs. arm devices, and these could impact decisions relating to the patient in clinical practice. Measurements taken using arm devices are more closely related to ABP values than those recorded by wrist devices. More research is needed before recommending the widespread use of wrist monitors in clinical practice. American Journal of Hypertension doi:10.1038/ajh.2008.176American Journal of Hypertension (2008); 21, 7, 753-758. doi:10.1038/ajh.2008.176.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18443566     DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.176

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Hypertens        ISSN: 0895-7061            Impact factor:   2.689


  6 in total

1.  A novel cuffless device for self-measurement of blood pressure: concept, performance and clinical validation.

Authors:  N Boubouchairopoulou; A Kollias; B Chiu; B Chen; S Lagou; P Anestis; G S Stergiou
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2017-01-26       Impact factor: 3.012

2.  Does "hidden undercuffing" occur among obese patients? Effect of arm sizes and other predictors of the difference between wrist and upper arm blood pressures.

Authors:  Hardik Doshi; Alan B Weder; Robert L Bard; Robert D Brook
Journal:  J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich)       Date:  2010-02-01       Impact factor: 3.738

Review 3.  Which cuff should I use? Indirect blood pressure measurement for the diagnosis of hypertension in patients with obesity: a diagnostic accuracy review.

Authors:  Greg Irving; John Holden; Richard Stevens; Richard J McManus
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2016-11-03       Impact factor: 2.692

4.  Adherence to blood pressure measurement guidelines in long-term care facilities: A cross sectional study.

Authors:  Sachiko Ozone; Mikiya Sato; Ayumi Takayashiki; Naoto Sakamoto; Hisashi Yoshimoto; Tetsuhiro Maeno
Journal:  J Gen Fam Med       Date:  2018-03-30

5.  Home blood pressure monitors owned by participants in a large decentralised clinical trial in hypertension: the Treatment In Morning versus Evening (TIME) study.

Authors:  Thineskrishna Anbarasan; Amy Rogers; David A Rorie; J W Kerr Grieve; Thomas M MacDonald; Isla S Mackenzie
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2021-02-15       Impact factor: 3.012

6.  Blood Pressure Screening by Outpatient Physical Therapists: A Call to Action and Clinical Recommendations.

Authors:  Richard Severin; Ahmad Sabbahi; Ali Albarrati; Shane A Phillips; Sara Arena
Journal:  Phys Ther       Date:  2020-06-23
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.