Literature DB >> 8762392

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.

C Cartwright1, N Unwin, P Stephenson.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVE: To assess agreement between two Takeda UA-731 automatic blood pressure measuring devices (referred to as machines A and B) and two manual mercury sphygmomanometers.
DESIGN: A 'Y' connector attached each Takeda UA-731 to a manual mercury sphygmomanometer. Simultaneous measurements were made on adult subjects.
SETTING: A population based cardiovascular disease survey in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Measurements on machine A were compared in 71 individuals (all women), and on machine B in 75 individuals (9 men, 66 women). The age range of subjects was 28 to 76 years and median ages were 59 years for machine A and 50 years for machine B. MAIN
RESULTS: Blood pressure (mmHg) ranged from 72 to 212 systolic and 44 to 102 diastolic. Both Takedas gave significantly lower readings than the manual devices for systolic and diastolic pressures: differences were mean (SD: 95% CI) 3.7 mmHg (6.5: 2.2, 5.2) for machine A systolic, 2.3 mmHg (4.5: 1.3, 3.4) machine A diastolic; 1.8 mmHg (6.2: 0.4, 3.3) machine B systolic, and 1.8 (4.4: 0.8, 2.8) machine B diastolic. On the British Hypertension Society criteria, machine A was graded C on systolic measurements and B on diastolic; machine B was graded B on both systolic and diastolic measurements.
CONCLUSIONS: The performance of these machines compares favourably with the Dinamap 8100, recently adopted for survey work by the Department of Health. The Takeda UA-731 looks promising for epidemiological survey work but before it can be fully recommended further evaluations are needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8762392      PMCID: PMC1060256          DOI: 10.1136/jech.50.2.218

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health        ISSN: 0143-005X            Impact factor:   3.710


  9 in total

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

Authors:  S Ornstein; G Markert; L Litchfield; L Zemp
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  1988-05       Impact factor: 0.493

2.  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

3.  Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement.

Authors:  J M Bland; D G Altman
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1986-02-08       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  Does the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer underestimate blood pressure, and by how much?

Authors:  A Mackie; P Whincup; M McKinnon
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  1995-05       Impact factor: 3.012

Review 5.  Measurement of blood pressure in the technological age.

Authors:  M J Stewart; P L Padfield
Journal:  Br Med Bull       Date:  1994-04       Impact factor: 4.291

6.  National standard for measurement of resting and ambulatory blood pressures with automated sphygmomanometers.

Authors:  W B White; A S Berson; C Robbins; M J Jamieson; L M Prisant; E Roccella; S G Sheps
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  1993-04       Impact factor: 10.190

Review 7.  A review of common errors in the indirect measurement of blood pressure. Sphygmomanometry.

Authors:  R H Bailey; J H Bauer
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  1993-12-27

8.  Comparative accuracy of six ambulatory devices according to blood pressure levels.

Authors:  E O'Brien; N Atkins; F Mee; K O'Malley
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  1993-06       Impact factor: 4.844

9.  The British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of automated and semi-automated blood pressure measuring devices with special reference to ambulatory systems.

Authors:  E O'Brien; J Petrie; W Littler; M de Swiet; P L Padfield; K O'Malley; M Jamieson; D Altman; M Bland; N Atkins
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  1990-07       Impact factor: 4.844

  9 in total
  3 in total

1.  Low levels of cardiovascular risk factors and coronary heart disease in a UK Chinese population.

Authors:  J O Harland; N Unwin; R S Bhopal; M White; B Watson; M Laker; K G Alberti
Journal:  J Epidemiol Community Health       Date:  1997-12       Impact factor: 3.710

2.  Community-based blood pressure measurement by non-health workers using electronic devices: a validation study.

Authors:  Daniel D Reidpath; Mei Lee Ling; Shajahan Yasin; Kanason Rajagobal; Pascale Allotey
Journal:  Glob Health Action       Date:  2012-06-27       Impact factor: 2.640

Review 3.  Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review.

Authors:  Noa Kallioinen; Andrew Hill; Mark S Horswill; Helen E Ward; Marcus O Watson
Journal:  J Hypertens       Date:  2017-03       Impact factor: 4.844

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.