OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of oscillometric and auscultatory blood pressure (BP) measurement taken using the professional electronic device Microlife Watch BP Office according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol. METHODS: Thirty-three participants were included for the assessment of each measurement mode (oscillometric and auscultatory). Simultaneous BP measurements were taken by two observers (mercury sphygmomanometers) four times, sequentially with three measurements taken using the tested device. Absolute observer device BP differences were calculated. For each participant the number of measurements with a difference within 5 mmHg was calculated. RESULTS: In phase 1 the device produced 32, 40 and 40 oscillometric systolic BP (SBP) measurements within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively and diastolic BP (DBP) 30, 40 and 43 (for auscultatory SBP 29, 42, 45 and DBP 33, 43, 45). In phase 2.1 the device produced 71, 90 and 96 SBP measurements within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively and DBP 71, 88 and 97 (for auscultatory SBP 72, 96, 99 and DBP 83, 96, 99). Twenty-four participants had at least two of their SBP differences within 5 mmHg and one participant had no difference within 5 mmHg, and DBP 23 and three participants, respectively (for auscultatory SBP 29 and 0 and DBP 29 and 1). Mean SBP difference was -1.4+/-6.3 mmHg and DBP -0.8+/-6.0 mmHg (auscultatory SBP -1.8+/-4.5 and DBP -0.4+/-4.0). CONCLUSION: The Microlife Watch BP Office device used in the oscillometric or the auscultatory mode fulfills the validation criteria of the International protocol and therefore can be recommended for clinical use.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of oscillometric and auscultatory blood pressure (BP) measurement taken using the professional electronic device Microlife Watch BP Office according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol. METHODS: Thirty-three participants were included for the assessment of each measurement mode (oscillometric and auscultatory). Simultaneous BP measurements were taken by two observers (mercury sphygmomanometers) four times, sequentially with three measurements taken using the tested device. Absolute observer device BP differences were calculated. For each participant the number of measurements with a difference within 5 mmHg was calculated. RESULTS: In phase 1 the device produced 32, 40 and 40 oscillometric systolic BP (SBP) measurements within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively and diastolic BP (DBP) 30, 40 and 43 (for auscultatory SBP 29, 42, 45 and DBP 33, 43, 45). In phase 2.1 the device produced 71, 90 and 96 SBP measurements within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively and DBP 71, 88 and 97 (for auscultatory SBP 72, 96, 99 and DBP 83, 96, 99). Twenty-four participants had at least two of their SBP differences within 5 mmHg and one participant had no difference within 5 mmHg, and DBP 23 and three participants, respectively (for auscultatory SBP 29 and 0 and DBP 29 and 1). Mean SBP difference was -1.4+/-6.3 mmHg and DBP -0.8+/-6.0 mmHg (auscultatory SBP -1.8+/-4.5 and DBP -0.4+/-4.0). CONCLUSION: The Microlife Watch BP Office device used in the oscillometric or the auscultatory mode fulfills the validation criteria of the International protocol and therefore can be recommended for clinical use.
Authors: Y Zhang; G Kollias; A A Argyris; T G Papaioannou; C Tountas; G D Konstantonis; A Achimastos; J Blacher; M E Safar; P P Sfikakis; A D Protogerou Journal: J Hum Hypertens Date: 2014-11-13 Impact factor: 3.012
Authors: Emmanuel A Andreadis; Epameinondas T Angelopoulos; Gerasimos D Agaliotis; Athanasios P Tsakanikas; George P Mousoulis Journal: High Blood Press Cardiovasc Prev Date: 2011-09-01
Authors: Joji Ishikawa; Efthimia G Nasothimiou; Nikos Karpettas; Scott McDoniel; Seth D Feltheimer; George S Stergiou; Thomas G Pickering; Joseph E Schwartz Journal: Blood Press Monit Date: 2012-06 Impact factor: 1.444
Authors: Robert R Quinn; Brenda R Hemmelgarn; Raj S Padwal; Martin G Myers; Lyne Cloutier; Peter Bolli; Donald W McKay; Nadia A Khan; Michael D Hill; Jeff Mahon; Daniel G Hackam; Steven Grover; Thomas Wilson; Brian Penner; Ellen Burgess; Finlay A McAlister; Maxime Lamarre-Cliche; Donna McLean; Ernesto L Schiffrin; George Honos; Karen Mann; Guy Tremblay; Alain Milot; Arun Chockalingam; Simon W Rabkin; Martin Dawes; Rhian M Touyz; Kevin D Burns; Marcel Ruzicka; Norman R C Campbell; Michel Vallée; G V Ramesh Prasad; Marcel Lebel; Sheldon W Tobe Journal: Can J Cardiol Date: 2010-05 Impact factor: 5.223