首页> 外文期刊>American Journal of Hypertension >Can validated wrist devices with position sensors replace arm devices for self-home blood pressure monitoring? A randomized crossover trial using ambulatory monitoring as reference.
【24h】

Can validated wrist devices with position sensors replace arm devices for self-home blood pressure monitoring? A randomized crossover trial using ambulatory monitoring as reference.

机译:经过验证的带位置传感器的腕部设备能否代替用于自家血压监测的手臂设备?以动态监测为参考的随机交叉试验。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Electronic devices that measure blood pressure (BP) at the arm level are regarded as more accurate than wrist devices and are preferred for home BP (HBP) monitoring. Recently, wrist devices with position sensors have been successfully validated using established protocols. This study assessed whether HBP values measured with validated wrist devices are sufficiently reliable to be used for making patient-related decisions in clinical practice. METHODS: This randomized crossover study compared HBP measurements taken using validated wrist devices (wrist-HBP, Omron R7 with position sensor) with those taken using arm devices (arm-HBP, Omron 705IT), and also with measurements of awake ambulatory BP (ABP, SpaceLabs), in 79 subjects (36 men and 43 women) with hypertension. The mean age of the study population was 56.7 +/- 11.8 years, and 33 of the subjects were not under treatment for hypertension. RESULTS: The average arm-HBP was higher than the average wrist-HBP (mean difference, systolic 5.2 +/-9.1 mm Hg, P 0.001, and diastolic 2.2 +/- 6.7, P 0.01). Twenty-seven subjects (34%) had a or =10 mm Hg difference between systolic wrist-HBP and arm-HBP and twelve subjects (15%) showed similar levels of disparity in diastolic HBP readings. Strong correlations were found between arm-HBP and wrist-HBP (r 0.74/0.74, systolic/diastolic, P 0.0001). However, ABP was more strongly correlated with arm-HBP (r 0.73/0.76) than with wrist-HBP (0.55/0.69). The wrist-arm HBP difference was associated with systolic ABP (r 0.34) and pulse pressure (r 0.29), but not with diastolic ABP, sex, age, arm circumference, and wrist circumference. CONCLUSIONS: There might be important differences in HBP measured using validated wrist devices with position sensor vs. arm devices, and these could impact decisions relating to the patient in clinical practice.Measurements taken using arm devices are more closely related to ABP values than those recorded by wrist devices. More research is needed before recommending thewidespread use of wrist monitors in clinical practice.American Journal of Hypertension doi:10.1038/ajh.2008.176American Journal of Hypertension (2008); 21, 7, 753-758. doi:10.1038/ajh.2008.176.
机译:背景技术:在手臂水平上测量血压(BP)的电子设备被认为比腕上设备更准确,并且是家庭BP(HBP)监视的首选。最近,具有位置传感器的腕部设备已使用已建立的协议成功进行了验证。这项研究评估了用经过验证的手腕装置测量的HBP值是否足够可靠,可用于在临床实践中做出患者相关的决定。方法:这项随机交叉研究比较了使用经过验证的手腕设备(腕式HBP,带位置传感器的Omron R7)和使用手臂设备(臂式HBP,Omron 705IT)进行的HBP测量,以及清醒动态血压(ABP)的测量结果。 (SpaceLabs),研究对象是79位高血压患者(36位男性和43位女性)。研究人群的平均年龄为56.7 +/- 11.8岁,其中33位受试者未接受高血压治疗。结果:平均手臂HBP高于平均手腕HBP(平均差异,收缩期为5.2 +/- 9.1 mm Hg,P <0.001,舒张期为2.2 +/- 6.7,P <0.01)。二十七名受试者(34%)的收缩期手腕-HBP和手臂-HBP差异≥10 mm Hg,十二名受试者(15%)的舒张期HBP读数差异相似。在手臂-HBP和腕部-HBP之间发现强相关性(r 0.74 / 0.74,收缩压/舒张压,P <0.0001)。但是,ABP与手臂HBP(r 0.73 / 0.76)的相关性比与腕部HBP(0.55 / 0.69)的相关性更强。腕臂HBP差异与收缩期ABP(r 0.34)和脉压(r 0.29)相关,但与舒张期ABP,性别,年龄,臂围和腕围无关。结论:使用经过验证的带位置传感器的腕部设备与手臂设备相比,HBP可能存在重要差异,这可能会影响临床实践中与患者有关的决定。使用手臂设备进行的测量与记录的ABP值更相关通过手腕装置。建议在临床实践中广泛使用腕式监护仪之前,还需要进行更多的研究。美国高血压杂志doi:10.1038 / ajh.2008.176《美国高血压杂志》(2008); 21、7、753-758。 doi:10.1038 / ajh.2008.176。

著录项

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