OBJECTIVE: To compare accuracy of blood pressure measurements using a live subject and a simulator arm, and to determine students' preferences regarding measurement. METHODS: This was a crossover study comparing blood pressure measurements from a live subject and a simulator arm. Students completed an anonymous survey instrument defining opinions on ease of measurement. RESULTS: Fifty-seven students completed blood pressure measurements on live subjects while 72 students completed blood pressure measurements using the simulator arm. There were no significant systematic differences between the 2 measurement techniques. Systolic blood pressure measurements from a live subject arm were less likely to be within 4 mm Hg compared with measurements of a simulator arm. Diastolic blood pressure measurements were not significantly different between the 2 techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of student measurement of blood pressure using a simulator arm was similar to the accuracy with a live subject. There was no difference in students' preferences regarding measurement techniques.
OBJECTIVE: To compare accuracy of blood pressure measurements using a live subject and a simulator arm, and to determine students' preferences regarding measurement. METHODS: This was a crossover study comparing blood pressure measurements from a live subject and a simulator arm. Students completed an anonymous survey instrument defining opinions on ease of measurement. RESULTS: Fifty-seven students completed blood pressure measurements on live subjects while 72 students completed blood pressure measurements using the simulator arm. There were no significant systematic differences between the 2 measurement techniques. Systolic blood pressure measurements from a live subject arm were less likely to be within 4 mm Hg compared with measurements of a simulator arm. Diastolic blood pressure measurements were not significantly different between the 2 techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Accuracy of student measurement of blood pressure using a simulator arm was similar to the accuracy with a live subject. There was no difference in students' preferences regarding measurement techniques.
Authors: Amy L Seybert; Karen K Laughlin; Neal J Benedict; Christine M Barton; Rhonda S Rea Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2006-06-15 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Rosemarie Fernandez; Dennis Parker; James S Kalus; Douglas Miller; Scott Compton Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2007-06-15 Impact factor: 2.047
Authors: Lindsay B Curtin; Laura A Finn; Quinn A Czosnowski; Craig B Whitman; Michael J Cawley Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2011-08-10 Impact factor: 2.047