...
首页> 外文期刊>Hypertension: An Official Journal of the American Heart Association >Arterial Stiffness as Underlying Mechanism of Disagreement Between an Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitor and a Sphygmomanometer
【24h】

Arterial Stiffness as Underlying Mechanism of Disagreement Between an Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitor and a Sphygmomanometer

机译:动脉僵硬度是示波血压计和血压计之间分歧的潜在机制

获取原文
           

摘要

Abstract —Oscillometric blood pressure devices tend to overestimate systolic blood pressure and underestimate diastolic blood pressure compared with sphygmomanometers. Recent studies indicate that discrepancies in performance between these devices may differ between healthy and diabetic subjects. Arterial stiffness in diabetics could be the underlying factor explaining these differences. We studied differences between a Dinamap oscillometric blood pressure monitor and a random-zero sphygmomanometer in relation to arterial stiffness in 1808 healthy elderly subjects. The study was conducted within the Rotterdam Study, a population-based cohort study of subjects aged 55 years and older. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure differences between a Dinamap and a random-zero sphygmomanometer were related to arterial stiffness, as measured by carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity. Increased arterial stiffness was associated with higher systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings by the Dinamap compared with the random-zero sphygmomanometer, independent of age, gender, and average mean blood pressure level of both devices. The β-coefficient (95% CI) was 0.25 (0.00 to 0.50) mm Hg/(m/s) for the systolic blood pressure difference and 0.35 (0.20 to 0.50) mm Hg/(m/s) for the diastolic blood pressure difference. The results indicate that a Dinamap oscillometric blood pressure device, in comparison to a random-zero sphygmomanometer, overestimates systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings in subjects with stiff arteries.
机译:摘要—与血压计相比,示波血压仪往往高估了收缩压而低估了舒张压。最近的研究表明,健康人和糖尿病人之间这些设备之间的性能差异可能有所不同。糖尿病患者的动脉僵硬可能是解释这些差异的潜在因素。我们研究了Dinamap示波血压计和随机零血压计在1808名健康老年受试者中与动脉僵硬度相关的差异。该研究在鹿特丹研究中进行,鹿特丹研究是一项基于人群的队列研究,对象是55岁及以上的受试者。 Dinamap和随机零血压计之间的收缩压和舒张压差与动脉僵硬度相关,如通过颈股股脉波速度测量的。与随机零血压计相比,Dinamap的动脉僵硬度增加与较高的收缩压和舒张压读数相关,而与年龄,性别和两种装置的平均平均血压水平无关。收缩压差的β系数(95%CI)为0.25(0.00至0.50)mm Hg /(m / s),舒张压的β系数为0.35(0.20至0.50)mm Hg /(m / s)区别。结果表明,与随机零血压计相比,Dinamap示波血压仪高估了动脉僵硬患者的收缩压和舒张压读数。

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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