Validation of three oscillometric blood pressure devices against auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in children

被引:136
作者
Wong, Sik-Nin
Sung, Rita Yn Tz
Leung, Lettie Chuk-Kwan
机构
[1] Tuen Mun Hosp, Dept Paediat & Adolescent Med, Tuen Mun, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[2] Prince Wales Hosp, Dept Paediat & Adolescent Med, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[3] Chinese Univ Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
[4] Kwong Wah Hosp, Dept Paediat & Adolescent Med, Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Peoples R China
关键词
blood pressure; children; datascope; Dinamap; European Society of Hypertension; international protocol; oscillometric; validation study; Welch-Allyn;
D O I
10.1097/01.mbp.0000209082.09623.b4
中图分类号
R6 [外科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100210 ;
摘要
Aim To validate Welch-Allyn Vital Sign Monitor, Dinamap Procare-120 and Datascope Accutorr Plus against auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in children aged 5-15 years old according to the International Protocol of European Society of Hypertension adapted for validation in children. Method One hundred and thirty two children were studied (44 for each device; 67 boys, 65 girls). Each underwent seven sequential BP measurements on the right arm resting in the sifting position, alternately with the mercury sphygmomanometer read simultaneously by two independent trained observers and the test device by a third observer. Results For the Welch-Allyn monitor, the mean +/- SD of differences (device minus auscultatory BP) were -4.39 +/- 4.82 mmHg for systolic blood pressure and -4.1 +/- 707 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure. The device failed phase 2.1 for both systolic blood pressure (55, 91 and 98% were within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively) and diastolic blood pressure measurements (46, 82 and 95% were within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively). For the Dinamap device, the mean +/- SD of differences were -3.08 +/- 5.21 mmHg for systolic blood pressure and -4.61 +/- 9.35 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure. The device passed phase 2.1 for systolic blood pressure (71, 96 and 98% were within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively) but failed for diastolic blood pressure (51, 72 and 91% were within 5, 10, and 15 mmHg, respectively). For the Datascope device, mean +/- SD of differences were -0.9 +/- 4.33 mmHg for systolic blood pressure and -1.20 +/- 6.48 mmHg for diastolic blood pressure. The device passed phase 2.1 in that 84, 97 and 99% of systolic blood pressure, and 61, 89 and 97% of diastolic blood pressure readings were within 5, 10 and 15 mmHg, respectively. It also passed phase 2.2 for both systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure. Conclusion We performed an independent validation of three oscillometric BP devices in children. Overall Datascope Accutorr Plus passed, whereas Welch-Allyn Vital Sign Monitor and Dinamap Procare-120 failed an adapted IP-ESH. Blood Press Monit 11:281-291 (C) 2006 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins.
引用
收藏
页码:281 / 291
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [31] A perfect replacement for the mercury sphygmomanometer: the case of the hybrid blood pressure monitor
    Stergiou, G. S.
    Karpettas, N.
    Kollias, A.
    Destounis, A.
    Tzamouranis, D.
    JOURNAL OF HUMAN HYPERTENSION, 2012, 26 (04) : 220 - 227
  • [32] A perfect replacement for the mercury sphygmomanometer: the case of the hybrid blood pressure monitor
    G S Stergiou
    N Karpettas
    A Kollias
    A Destounis
    D Tzamouranis
    Journal of Human Hypertension, 2012, 26 : 220 - 227
  • [33] Validation of the Omron 705 IT oscillometric device for home blood pressure measurement in children and adolescents: The Arsakion School Study
    Stergiou, George S.
    Yiannes, Nikolaos G.
    Rarra, Vayia C.
    BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, 2006, 11 (04) : 229 - 234
  • [34] Office blood pressure measurements with oscillometric devices in adolescents: a comparison with home blood pressure
    Jardim, Thiago Veiga
    Gaziano, Thomas A.
    Nascente, Flavia Miquetichuc
    Carneiro, Carolina de Souza
    Morais, Polyana
    Roriz, Vanessa
    Mendonca, Karla Lorena
    Rolim Povoa, Thais Inacio
    Sebba Barroso, Weimar Kunz
    Lima Sousa, Ana Luiza
    Veiga Jardim, Paulo Cesar
    BLOOD PRESSURE, 2017, 26 (05) : 272 - 278
  • [35] Open Questions on Unified Approach for Calibration of Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement Devices
    Balestrieri, E.
    Daponte, P.
    Rapuano, S.
    MEMEA: 2009 IEEE INTERNATIONAL WORKSHOP ON MEDICAL MEASUREMENTS AND APPLICATIONS, 2009, : 206 - 211
  • [36] Comparison of Invasive and Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement in Obese and Nonobese Children
    Fundora, Michael P.
    Beshish, Asaad G.
    Rao, Nikita
    Berry, Christopher M.
    Figueroa, Janet
    McCracken, Courtney
    Maher, Kevin O.
    AMERICAN JOURNAL OF HYPERTENSION, 2021, 34 (06) : 619 - 625
  • [37] Sensor fusion in human blood pressure measurements using oscillometric and auscultatory principles: Error analysis and implementation
    Tavares, Noel
    Vetrekar, Narayan
    Gad, R. S.
    Kakodkar, Uday
    BIOMEDICAL SIGNAL PROCESSING AND CONTROL, 2022, 71
  • [38] Comparison between blood pressure readings using a mercury versus an aneroid sphygmomanometer
    Farhan, Kinaan
    Naqvi, S. Tahira Shah
    Rizvi, Syed Asad Hasan
    Zafar, Amara
    Rawala, Muhammad Shabbir
    BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING, 2020, 25 (01) : 34 - 38
  • [39] Validation of Missouri Aneroid Sphygmomanometer to Measure Blood Pressure in Patients with Cance
    Sao Leao Ferreira, Karine Azevedo
    dos Santos, Ana Claudia
    Arthur, Thais Cardoso
    dos Santos, Daniela Aparecida A.
    Pereira, Daniela
    Freitas, Elizangela Oliveira
    Fukuda, Fernanda Medeiros
    Mollo Baia, Wania Regina
    ARQUIVOS BRASILEIROS DE CARDIOLOGIA, 2010, 95 (02) : 244 - 250
  • [40] Blood pressure measurement in pediatric population: comparison between automated oscillometric devices and mercury sphygmomanometers-a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Araujo-Moura, Keisyanne
    Souza, Leticia Gabrielle
    Mello, Gabriele Luz
    Ferreira De Moraes, Augusto Cesar
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF PEDIATRICS, 2022, 181 (01) : 9 - 22