首页> 外文期刊>European journal of internal medicine >A comparative study of an ambulatory blood pressure measuring device and a wrist blood pressure monitor with a position sensor versus a mercury sphygmomanometer.
【24h】

A comparative study of an ambulatory blood pressure measuring device and a wrist blood pressure monitor with a position sensor versus a mercury sphygmomanometer.

机译:带有位置传感器和汞血压计的动态血压测量设备和腕部血压计的对比研究。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: Self-measurements of blood pressure (BP) and 24-hour BP measurements are better predictors of cardiovascular mortality and morbidity than office BP measurements. The objective of this study was to compare the accuracy and precision of a wrist BP monitor with a position sensor (Omron 637IT) and of an ambulatory BP measuring monitor (ABPM; Nissei DS-250) with a mercury sphygmomanometer. METHODS: A total of 139 patients (69 women and 70 men) were included in the study. The BP of each subject was first measured with a mercury device using the same (left) arm. After this, the wrist monitor was used for BP measurement. Upon completion of the BP readings, 24-hour BP monitoring was performed using Nissei DS-250 monitors. Mean and standard deviations were calculated for all devices. In order to assess the agreement between the measurement methods, the Bland-Altman method and graphics were utilized. RESULTS: The mean systolic BP measured by the mercury device was 133.2+/-18.4 mmHg and the diastolic BP was 85.4+/-12.5 mmHg, whereas the digital device measured systolic BP as 135.7+/-17.2 mmHg and diastolic BP as 87.0+/-12.5 mmHg. The 24-hour BP measurement was 134.6+/-16.6 mmHg for systolic BP and 85.6+/-11.1 mmHg for diastolic BP. The difference with regard to systolic BP between the mercury and the Omron devices was -2.5+/-5.3 mmHg, which is within the AAMI standard. However, while the mean values of the differences between the mercury and ABPM devices remained under 5 mmHg, their standard deviation was above +/- 8 mmHg. For diastolic BP, the difference between all of the devices was below 5+/-8 mmHg. CONCLUSIONS: The wrist BP monitor produced results consistent with those of the mercury sphygmomanometer when both were compared with the results of the ABPM. As BP measurement with these devices is a practical and repeatable method, they can be used instead of ABPM in the diagnosis and monitoring of hypertension. However, there is a need for further comparative studies.
机译:背景:血压(BP)的自我测量和24小时BP测量比办公室BP测量更能预测心血管疾病的死亡率和发病率。这项研究的目的是比较带位置传感器的腕式BP监护仪(Omron 637IT)和带血压计的动态BP测量监护仪(ABPM; Nissei DS-250)的准确性和精确性。方法:本研究共纳入139例患者(69名女性和70名男性)。首先使用相同(左)臂的水银仪测量每个受试者的血压。之后,将腕式监护仪用于血压测量。 BP读数完成后,使用Nissei DS-250监护仪进行24小时BP监护。计算所有设备的均值和标准差。为了评估测量方法之间的一致性,使用了Bland-Altman方法和图形。结果:汞仪测得的平均收缩压为133.2 +/- 18.4 mmHg,舒张压为85.4 +/- 12.5 mmHg,而数字设备测得的收缩压为135.7 +/- 17.2 mmHg,舒张压为87.0+ /-12.5毫米汞柱。收缩压的24小时血压测量值为134.6 +/- 16.6 mmHg,舒张压的血压为85.6 +/- 11.1 mmHg。汞和Omron装置之间的收缩压差为-2.5 +/- 5.3 mmHg,在AAMI标准之内。但是,尽管汞和ABPM装置之间的差异平均值保持在5 mmHg以下,但它们的标准偏差仍在+/- 8 mmHg以上。对于舒张压BP,所有装置之间的差异均低于5 +/- 8 mmHg。结论:将腕部BP监护仪与ABPM的结果进行比较时,得出的结果与水银血压计的结果一致。由于使用这些设备进行血压测量是一种实用且可重复的方法,因此可以将它们代替ABPM用于诊断和监测高血压。但是,需要进行进一步的比较研究。

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