OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the agreement of blood pressure measurements and hypertension scores obtained by use of 3 indirect arterial blood pressure measurement devices in hospitalized dogs. Design-Diagnostic test evaluation. ANIMALS: 29 client-owned dogs. PROCEDURES: 5 to 7 consecutive blood pressure readings were obtained from each dog on each of 3 occasions with a Doppler ultrasonic flow detector, a standard oscillometric device (STO), and a high-definition oscillometric device (HDO). RESULTS: When the individual sets of 5 to 7 readings were evaluated, the coefficient of variation for systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) exceeded 20% for 0% (Doppler), 11 % (STO), and 28% (HDO) of the sets of readings. After readings that exceeded a 20% coefficient of variation were discarded, repeatability was within 25 (Doppler), 37 (STO), and 39 (HDO) mm Hg for SAP. Correlation of mean values among the devices was between 0.47 and 0.63. Compared with Doppler readings, STO underestimated and HDO overestimated SAP. Limits of agreement between mean readings of any 2 devices were wide. With the hypertension scale used to score SAP, the intraclass correlation of scores was 0.48. Linear-weighted inter-rater reliability between scores was 0.40 (Doppler vs STO), 0.38 (Doppler vs HDO), and 0.29 (STO vs HDO). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of this study suggested that no meaningful clinical comparison can be made between blood pressure readings obtained from the same dog with different indirect blood pressure measurement devices.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the agreement of blood pressure measurements and hypertension scores obtained by use of 3 indirect arterial blood pressure measurement devices in hospitalized dogs. Design-Diagnostic test evaluation. ANIMALS: 29 client-owned dogs. PROCEDURES: 5 to 7 consecutive blood pressure readings were obtained from each dog on each of 3 occasions with a Doppler ultrasonic flow detector, a standard oscillometric device (STO), and a high-definition oscillometric device (HDO). RESULTS: When the individual sets of 5 to 7 readings were evaluated, the coefficient of variation for systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) exceeded 20% for 0% (Doppler), 11 % (STO), and 28% (HDO) of the sets of readings. After readings that exceeded a 20% coefficient of variation were discarded, repeatability was within 25 (Doppler), 37 (STO), and 39 (HDO) mm Hg for SAP. Correlation of mean values among the devices was between 0.47 and 0.63. Compared with Doppler readings, STO underestimated and HDO overestimated SAP. Limits of agreement between mean readings of any 2 devices were wide. With the hypertension scale used to score SAP, the intraclass correlation of scores was 0.48. Linear-weighted inter-rater reliability between scores was 0.40 (Doppler vs STO), 0.38 (Doppler vs HDO), and 0.29 (STO vs HDO). CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Results of this study suggested that no meaningful clinical comparison can be made between blood pressure readings obtained from the same dog with different indirect blood pressure measurement devices.
Authors: Olga Szaluś-Jordanow; Michał Czopowicz; Anna Świerk; Oktawia Szpinda; Magdalena Garncarz; Marcin Mickiewicz; Agata Moroz; Emilia Bagnicka; Jarosław Kaba Journal: Can J Vet Res Date: 2018-10 Impact factor: 1.310
Authors: Olga Szaluś-Jordanow; Michał Czopowicz; Agata Moroz; Marcin Mickiewicz; Magdalena Garncarz; Emilia Bagnicka; Tadeusz Frymus; Jarosław Kaba Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 3.240