OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the Microlife 3AS1-2 blood pressure (BP) device in pregnant women with low BP to investigate suitability for hypotensive detection in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: A prospective observational study was carried out evaluating the Microlife 3AS1-2, a hand-held, upper-arm, semiautomated BP device, according to British Hypertension Society (BHS) protocol methods. Thirty (stable) pregnant women with a clinical systolic BP less than 100 mmHg and/or diastolic BP less than 60 mmHg were recruited from antenatal wards and clinics and their BP was measured by three trained observers at a district-level hospital in South Africa. Accuracy was assessed according to the BHS grading criteria (A/B=pass) and the ANSI/AAMI/ISO standard for mean difference and SD (≤5±8 mmHg). RESULTS: The device achieved an A/A grade according to the BHS grading criteria. The mean difference±SD between the observer and the test device was 0.5±6.2 and 1.3±5.4 mmHg for systolic and diastolic BP, respectively, fulfilling the standard required by the ANSI/AAMI/ISO protocol. All observer differences were within 4 mmHg. CONCLUSION: According to the BHS protocol, the Microlife 3AS1-2 BP device is accurate in pregnant women with low BP. The device has been validated previously in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia and also fulfils the criteria of the WHO for use in a low-resource setting. Although unstable women were not included in this validation (for safety and pragmatic reasons), this device could potentially improve the detection of shock secondary to obstetric haemorrhage or sepsis, as well as being used in pre-eclampsia, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the Microlife 3AS1-2 blood pressure (BP) device in pregnant women with low BP to investigate suitability for hypotensive detection in low-income and middle-income countries. METHODS: A prospective observational study was carried out evaluating the Microlife 3AS1-2, a hand-held, upper-arm, semiautomated BP device, according to British Hypertension Society (BHS) protocol methods. Thirty (stable) pregnant women with a clinical systolic BP less than 100 mmHg and/or diastolic BP less than 60 mmHg were recruited from antenatal wards and clinics and their BP was measured by three trained observers at a district-level hospital in South Africa. Accuracy was assessed according to the BHS grading criteria (A/B=pass) and the ANSI/AAMI/ISO standard for mean difference and SD (≤5±8 mmHg). RESULTS: The device achieved an A/A grade according to the BHS grading criteria. The mean difference±SD between the observer and the test device was 0.5±6.2 and 1.3±5.4 mmHg for systolic and diastolic BP, respectively, fulfilling the standard required by the ANSI/AAMI/ISO protocol. All observer differences were within 4 mmHg. CONCLUSION: According to the BHS protocol, the Microlife 3AS1-2 BP device is accurate in pregnant women with low BP. The device has been validated previously in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia and also fulfils the criteria of the WHO for use in a low-resource setting. Although unstable women were not included in this validation (for safety and pragmatic reasons), this device could potentially improve the detection of shock secondary to obstetric haemorrhage or sepsis, as well as being used in pre-eclampsia, particularly in low-income and middle-income countries.
Authors: Natalie A Bello; Jonathan J Woolley; Kirsten Lawrence Cleary; Louise Falzon; Bruce S Alpert; Suzanne Oparil; Gary Cutter; Ronald Wapner; Paul Muntner; Alan T Tita; Daichi Shimbo Journal: Hypertension Date: 2017-12-11 Impact factor: 10.190
Authors: Monica C Myers; Debra S Brandt; April Prunty; Stephanie Gilbertson-White; Amy Sanborn; Mark K Santillan; Donna A Santillan Journal: Pregnancy Hypertens Date: 2022-01-04 Impact factor: 2.899
Authors: Catherine E Majors; Chelsey A Smith; Mary E Natoli; Kathryn A Kundrod; Rebecca Richards-Kortum Journal: Lab Chip Date: 2017-10-11 Impact factor: 6.799
Authors: Alison M El Ayadi; Hannah L Nathan; Paul T Seed; Elizabeth A Butrick; Natasha L Hezelgrave; Andrew H Shennan; Suellen Miller Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-02-22 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Hannah L Nathan; Helena Boene; Khatia Munguambe; Esperança Sevene; David Akeju; Olalekan O Adetoro; Umesh Charanthimath; Mrutyunjaya B Bellad; Annemarie de Greeff; John Anthony; David R Hall; Wilhelm Steyn; Marianne Vidler; Peter von Dadelszen; Lucy C Chappell; Jane Sandall; Andrew H Shennan Journal: Reprod Health Date: 2018-01-05 Impact factor: 3.223
Authors: Nicola Vousden; Elodie Lawley; Hannah L Nathan; Paul T Seed; Adrian Brown; Tafadzwa Muchengwa; Umesh Charantimath; Mrutyunjaya Bellad; Muchabayiwa Francis Gidiri; Shivaprasad Goudar; Lucy C Chappell; Jane Sandall; Andrew H Shennan Journal: BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 3.007
Authors: Hannah L Nathan; Paul T Seed; Natasha L Hezelgrave; Annemarie De Greeff; Elodie Lawley; John Anthony; David R Hall; Wilhelm Steyn; Lucy C Chappell; Andrew H Shennan Journal: Pregnancy Hypertens Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 2.899
Authors: Hannah L Nathan; Nicola Vousden; Elodie Lawley; Annemarie de Greeff; Natasha L Hezelgrave; Nicola Sloan; Nina Tanna; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Muchabayiwa F Gidiri; Jane Sandall; Lucy C Chappell; Andrew H Shennan Journal: BMJ Innov Date: 2018-09-19
Authors: Hannah L Nathan; Kate Duhig; Nicola Vousden; Elodie Lawley; Paul T Seed; Jane Sandall; Mrutyunjaya B Bellad; Adrian C Brown; Lucy C Chappell; Shivaprasad S Goudar; Muchabayiwa F Gidiri; Andrew H Shennan Journal: Trials Date: 2018-03-27 Impact factor: 2.279