Home Current Issue Previous Issues Published Ahead-of-Print For Authors Journal Info
Skip Navigation LinksHome > October 2011 - Volume 16 - Issue 5 > Clinical blood pressure measurement verification when compar...
Blood Pressure Monitoring:
doi: 10.1097/MBP.0b013e328349a4da
Devices and Technology

Clinical blood pressure measurement verification when comparing a Tensoval duo control device with a mercury sphygmomanometer in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation

Farsky, Stefana; Benova, Katarinab; Krausova, Darinac; Sirotiaková, Janad; Vysocanova, Petrae

Collapse Box

Abstract

Aim: The aim of our study was to compare the accuracy of blood pressure measurements in patients with atrial fibrillation using simultaneous measurements by a mercury sphygmomanometer and an electronic device Tensoval duo control, produced by Hartmann-Rico, with dual control of the measurements (oscillometric and auscultation).

Materials and methods: A total of 255 patients were examined at five clinics using two simultaneous measurements with a time interval of at least 3 min. The measurement accuracy analysis was carried out using a paired t-test, at several levels, throughout the whole group of patients, by considering the patient’s sex and age and using a standard or larger cuff. Differences between both methods in absolute values were categorized into one of four bands (<5, <10, <15 mmHg and more). Analyses according to the location of participating clinics and higher versus lower pulse rate during examination were also carried out.

Results: For systolic blood pressure, the difference of the measured values between the mercury and duo control device was on average 0.1 mmHg [standard deviation=4.7 (not significant)]. For diastolic blood pressure, the difference in measured values was on average −0.7 mmHg [standard deviation=4.7, P<0.05]. The values of diastolic blood pressure measured using duo control were on average 0.7 mmHg higher than the values measured using the mercury sphygmomanometer, whereas in the subgroup using the standard cuff the difference was on average −1.1 mmHg. Subanalyses related to sex, age, location of participating clinics and pulse value higher or lower than 60 bpm did not reveal significant differences.

Conclusion: Measuring blood pressure using an electronic device with a dual control of measurement provides accurate results even in the case of absolute arrhythmia, such as atrial fibrillation. Minimum differences in the values of diastolic blood pressure are clinically insignificant.

© 2011 Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Inc.

Login

Search for Similar Articles
You may search for similar articles that contain these same keywords or you may modify the keyword list to augment your search.