Literature DB >> 9554677

Accuracy of an automated blood pressure device in stable inpatients: optimum vs routine use.

C L Shuler1, N Allison, S Holcomb, M Harlan, J McNeill, G Robinett, S P Bagby.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Despite widespread use of the automated blood pressure (BP) device (IVAC model 4200, IVAC Corporation, San Diego, Calif), there is little formal validation in the literature on its accuracy.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the accuracy of the IVAC 4200 device, both under standardized conditions and as routinely used by ward staff, compared with the true indirect BP measured by mercury manometer (MM).
METHODS: One hundred forty-five stable inpatients were randomly selected for BP measurements by 3 randomly ordered protocols: (1) MM performed by certified investigators, (2) IVAC 4200 BP performed by trained investigators (research automated [RA]), and (3) IVAC 4200 BP performed by ward personnel (ward automated [WA]).
RESULTS: For RA compared with MM ("true" indirect BP), 59% of systolic and 54% of diastolic readings were within 5 mm Hg and 83% of systolic and 86% of diastolic were within 10 mm Hg for a British Hypertension Society grade C for both. For WA compared with MM, 40% of systolic and 50% of diastolic readings were within 5 mm Hg and 70% of systolic and 80% of diastolic readings were within 10 mm Hg for British Hypertension Society grades D and C, respectively. The presence of arrhythmias and/or low K5 values (fifth phase of Korotkoff sounds <30 mm Hg) significantly increased the inaccuracy for diastolic values. Inappropriate cuff selection significantly increased inaccuracy of systolic BP (WA vs MM).
CONCLUSIONS: The IVAC 4200 yields substandard estimates of systolic and diastolic BP even under standardized, thus optimum conditions. The presence of arrhythmias or low K5 values and the selection of inappropriate cuff size by the ward staff also contributed to inaccuracy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9554677     DOI: 10.1001/archinte.158.7.714

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-9926


  4 in total

1.  Model-based oscillometric blood pressure measurement: preliminary validation in humans.

Authors:  Jiankun Liu; Hao-min Cheng; Chen-Huan Chen; Shih-Hsien Sung; Jin-Oh Hahn; Ramakrishna Mukkamala
Journal:  Conf Proc IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc       Date:  2014

Review 2.  Determining which automatic digital blood pressure device performs adequately: a systematic review.

Authors:  Y Wan; C Heneghan; R Stevens; R J McManus; A Ward; R Perera; M Thompson; L Tarassenko; D Mant
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2010-04-08       Impact factor: 3.012

3.  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 4.  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

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.