首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Journal of Cardiovascular and Thoracic Research >Effect of Peripheral Edema on Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement
【2h】

Effect of Peripheral Edema on Oscillometric Blood Pressure Measurement

机译:周围水肿对示波血压测量的影响

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

>Introduction: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is essential for epidemiological studies and clinical decisions. It seems that tissue characteristics can affect BP results and we try to find edema effect on BP results taken by different methods. >Methods: BP of 55 children before open heart surgery were measured and compared according to three methods: Arterial as standard and reference, oscillometric and auscultatory methods. Peripheral edema as a tissue characteristic was defined in higher than +2 as marked edema and in equal or lower than +2 as no edema. Statistical analyses: data was expressed as Mean and 95% of confidence interval (CI 95%). Comparison of two groups was performed by T independent test and of more than two groups by ANOVA test. Mann–Whitney U and paired T-test were used for serially comparisons of changes. P less than 0.05 was considered significant. >Results: Fifty five children aged 29.4±3.9 months were divided into two groups: 10 children with peripheral edema beyond +2 and 45 cases without edema. Oscillometric method overestimated systolic BP and the Mean (CI 95%) difference of oscillometric to arterial was 4.8 (8/-1, P=0.02) in edematous and 4.2 (7/1, p=0.004) in non edematous. Oscillometric method underestimated diastolic BP as -9 (-1.8/-16.5, P=0.03) in edematous group and 2.6 (-0.7/+5, P= 0.2) in non edematous compared to arterial method. >Conclusion: Oscillometric device standards cannot cover all specific clinical conditions. It underestimates diastolic BP significantly in edematous children, which was 9.2 mmHg in average beyond the acceptable standards.
机译:>简介:血压(BP)的测量对于流行病学研究和临床决策至关重要。似乎组织特征会影响BP结果,因此我们尝试通过不同方法来发现对BP结果的浮肿作用。 >方法:按照以下三种方法测量并比较了55名儿童在心脏直视手术前的血压:以动脉为标准和参照,示波法和听诊法。作为组织特征的周围水肿定义为高于+2为明显水肿,等于或低于+2为无水肿。统计分析:数据表示为均值和95%的置信区间(CI 95%)。两组之间的比较通过T独立检验进行,两组以上通过ANOVA检验进行比较。 Mann–Whitney U和配对的T检验用于序列的变化比较。 P小于0.05被认为是显着的。 >结果:将29.4±3.9个月的55例儿童分为两组:10例+2以上的周围性水肿患儿和45例无水肿的病例。示波法高估了收缩压,水肿示波法与动脉示波法的均值(CI 95%)差异为4.8(8 / -1,P = 0.02),非水肿示波法的平均值为4.2(7/1,p = 0.004)。示波法低估了水肿组的舒张压BP(-9)(-1.8 / -16.5,P = 0.03),非水肿组低估了2.6(-0.7 / + 5,P = 0.2)。 >结论:示波法设备标准不能涵盖所有特定的临床情况。它明显低估了水肿患儿的舒张压,平均超出可接受标准9.2 mmHg。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号