Literature DB >> 3367116

Evaluation of the DINAMAP blood pressure monitor in an ambulatory primary care setting.

S Ornstein1, G Markert, L Litchfield, L Zemp.   

Abstract

Automatic blood pressure recorders have gained acceptance in many clinical settings. New devices have usually been validated with invasive monitoring as the "gold standard." There is a lack of sound empirical evidence, however, supporting the routine use of these monitors in ambulatory settings. This study evaluated the DINAMAP 8100, an oscillometric automated blood pressure monitor, using the Hawksley Random-Zero Sphygmomanometer as the standard. A sample of 80 normotensive and hypertensive ambulatory patients from the Department of Family Medicine at the Medical University of South Carolina were studied. A clinical trial was conducted in which readings from the DINAMAP 8100 were compared with those from the Hawksley Random-Zero Sphygmomanometer, in a 2 (instrument) X 2 (arm) X 2 (investigators) X 4 (pairs of simultaneous measurements) factorial design. The DINAMAP 8100 overestimated systolic readings (mean difference = 7.6 +/- 9.1 mmHg, P less than .0001, paired t test). More than one third of systolic measurements and one quarter of diastolic measurements were greater than 10 mmHg discrepant from the standard. The results of this study suggest that routine use of the DINAMAP 8100 would lead to serious misclassification errors in screening for hypertension and in the follow-up of known hypertensive patients. The DINAMAP 8100, therefore, is not an appropriate instrument for routine use in primary care settings.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1988        PMID: 3367116

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Fam Pract        ISSN: 0094-3509            Impact factor:   0.493


  6 in total

1.  The Dinamap 1846SX automated blood pressure recorder: comparison with the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer under field conditions.

Authors:  P H Whincup; N G Bruce; D G Cook; A G Shaper
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1992-04       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Indirect blood pressure measurement using the Riva Rocci Korotkoff method.

Authors:  H H Ros
Journal:  J Clin Monit       Date:  1995-03

3.  Measurement error in the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer: what damage has been done and what can we learn?

Authors:  R M Conroy; E O'Brien; K O'Malley; N Atkins
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  1993-05-15

4.  A proposal for scientific validation of instruments for indirect blood pressure measurement at rest, during exercise, and in critical care.

Authors:  Y Iyriboz; C M Hearon
Journal:  J Clin Monit       Date:  1994-05

5.  Agreement between the Takeda UA-731 automatic blood pressure measuring device and the manual mercury sphygmomanometer: an assessment under field conditions in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.

Authors:  C Cartwright; N Unwin; P Stephenson
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 3.710

6.  Outcome-Driven Thresholds for Ambulatory Blood Pressure Based on the New American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Classification of Hypertension.

Authors:  Yi-Bang Cheng; Lutgarde Thijs; Zhen-Yu Zhang; Masahiro Kikuya; Wen-Yi Yang; Jesus D Melgarejo; José Boggia; Fang-Fei Wei; Tine W Hansen; Cai-Guo Yu; Kei Asayama; Takayoshi Ohkubo; Eamon Dolan; Katarzyna Stolarz-Skrzypek; Sofia Malyutina; Edoardo Casiglia; Lars Lind; Jan Filipovský; Gladys E Maestre; Yutaka Imai; Kalina Kawecka-Jaszcz; Edgardo Sandoya; Krzysztof Narkiewicz; Yan Li; Eoin O'Brien; Ji-Guang Wang; Jan A Staessen
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2019-08-05       Impact factor: 10.190

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.