Upper limb dimensions in adults presenting for elective surgery - implications for blood pressure measurement.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Chow C
PROVIDER: S-EPMC7126166 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Apr
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Upper limb dimensions in adults presenting for elective surgery - implications for blood pressure measurement.
Chow Christopher C Ceglowski Peter P Lehane Katie K Pelecanos Anita A Wren Kellie K Eley Victoria A VA
BMC anesthesiology 20200404 1
<h4>Background</h4>Arm conicity is associated with non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurement error and may be avoided by using finger cuffs. Predicting arm conicity may help decisions regarding NIBP measurement techniques.<h4>Methods</h4>We obtained upper limb measurements of adults presenting to the Pre-Anesthetic Clinic to determine: the suitability of arm and finger cuff sizes; the best anthropometric predictor of arm conicity based on the right arm slant angle; the incidence of a right ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:Blood pressure (BP) is a leading global risk factor. Increasing age is related to changes in cardiovascular physiology that could influence cuff BP measurement, but this has never been examined systematically and was the aim of this study. Cuff BP was compared with invasive aortic BP across decades of age (from 40 to 89 years) using individual-level data from 31 studies (1674 patients undergoing coronary angiography) and 22 different cuff BP devices (19 oscillometric, 1 automated auscultation, 2 mercury sphygmomanometry) from the Invasive Blood Pressure Consortium. Subjects were aged 64±11 years, and 32% female. Cuff systolic BP overestimated invasive aortic systolic BP in those aged 40 to 49 years, but with each older decade of age, there was a progressive shift toward increasing underestimation of aortic systolic BP (P<0.0001). Conversely, cuff diastolic BP overestimated invasive aortic diastolic BP, and this progressively increased with increasing age (P<0.0001). Thus, there was a progressive increase in cuff pulse pressure underestimation of invasive aortic PP with increasing decades of age (P<0.0001). These age-related trends were observed across all categories of BP control. We conclude that cuff BP as an estimate of aortic BP was substantially influenced by increasing age, thus potentially exposing older people to greater chance for misdiagnosis of the true risk related to BP.
| S-EPMC7035100 | biostudies-literature
Project description:According to the European Hypertension Guidelines regarding office blood pressure measurements (OBPMs), the mean between second/third or third/fourth OBPM should be taken if the first two readings differ by ≤10 or >10 mmHg, respectively. Our aim was to explore the value of the fourth OBPM and determine whether a simplified OBPM procedure is feasible without loss of quality. In this cross-sectional study, four standard OBPMs were taken. The mean of the second/third OBPM (S2S3/D2D3) and third/fourth OBPM (S3S4/D3D4) for systolic/diastolic values was calculated. Correlation, agreement, and differences regarding BP classification were explored for the entire cohort and subsets with a difference between the first/second OBPM (S1S2/D1D2) ≤10 and >10 mmHg. Overall (n = 802) and for the subsets with an S1S2 (n = 596) and D1D2 (n = 742) difference ≤10 mmHg, S3S4/D3D4 was in median 0.5 mmHg lower than S2S3/D2D3, respectively (p < .0005 for all). In participants with an S1S2 (n = 206) and D1D2 (n = 60) difference >10 mmHg, S3S4/D3D4 differed numerically from S2S3/D2D3, respectively (p > .1 for all). Overall and for all subsets with an S1S2/D1D2 difference ≤10/>10 mmHg, less subjects were numerically classified as hypertensive with S3S4/D3D4 than with S2S3/D2D3 (p > .04), but BP reclassification occurred in both directions in 1.0%-10.0%, depending on the cohort. In conclusion, the third/fourth OBPM results in lower BP values than the second/third measurement, regardless of the difference between first/second OBPM, whereby BP reclassifications occurred in both directions. Therefore, the cutoff of >10 versus ≤10mmHg difference between first/second OBPM to implement a fourth BPM harbors the risk of distorted results. We therefore recommend using the second/third BPM for standardized OBPM. Trial registration: Registered on clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02552030).
| S-EPMC8030098 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Peripheral neuropathy in primary (AL) amyloidosis is usually lower-limb predominant, length-dependent, symmetrical, and affects small (pain and autonomic) fibers, as much or more than large fibers. We report a patient with stepwise progressive, multiple upper limb mononeuropathies that were due to nerve biopsy-proven primary amyloidosis (lambda light chain), with no systemic or autonomic features. Recognition that light chain amyloidosis may be the cause of a multiple mononeuropathy pattern adds to the differential diagnosis of this clinical phenotype.
| S-EPMC2947379 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular morbidity and mortality was reduced by 25% when blood pressure (BP) was targeted to 120 mm Hg systolic compared with 140 mm Hg systolic in Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT); however, BP was measured using a research technique. SPRINT specified 5 minutes of seated rest in a quiet room followed by 3 oscillometric measurements without an observer in the room. The relationship of this research-grade methodology to routine BP measurements is not known.Methods and resultsAmong 275 people with chronic kidney disease who had BP <140/90 mm Hg when they came to the clinic, we measured BP as in SPRINT and recorded BP on the same day without specification of seated rest. Compared with routine measurement, the research-grade systolic BP was 12.7 mm Hg lower with wide limits of agreement (-46.1 to 20.7 mm Hg). Research grade systolic BP was 7.9 mm Hg lower than daytime ambulatory systolic BP and had wide agreement limits (-33.2 to 17.4 mm Hg). Whereas the routine, research-grade, and daytime ambulatory systolic BP were all related to echocardiographic left ventricular hypertrophy, the strength of the relationship between research-grade and daytime ambulatory systolic BP to left ventricular hypertrophy was similar and stronger than the strength of the relationship between routine systolic BP and left ventricular hypertrophy.ConclusionsTaken together, these results suggest that translation of the SPRINT results will require measurement of BP as performed in that trial. Instead of an algebraic manipulation of routine clinic measurements, the SPRINT methodology of BP measurement would be needed at minimum if implementation of the SPRINT results were to be deployed in the population at large.
| S-EPMC5523757 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Objectives:This study compared the efficacy and safety of minimal tourniquet pressure using either determined limb occlusion pressure (LOP) or estimated arterial occlusion pressure (AOP) for elective upper limb surgeries. Methods:Forty patients undergone elective upper limb surgery under general hypotensive anesthesia were randomized into groups A and B, where tourniquet pressure was calculated using AOP estimation for group A and LOP determination for group B. AOP, LOP, the time needed to estimate the AOP and determine the LOP and set the tourniquet inflation pressure, tourniquet inflation pressure, initial and maximal systolic blood pressure, heart rate, intraoperative fentanyl requirement, arm circumference, and tourniquet time were recorded. Tourniquet performance was assessed, and signs of tourniquet-related complications were noticed. Results:Systolic arterial blood pressure was comparable between the groups. Less time was recorded for measuring AOP or LOP and set the minimal inflation pressure (in second) in group A than in group B (62 ± 2 for group A vs. 120 ± 3 for group B; P < 0.001). The estimated AOP in group A was significantly higher than the determined LOP in group B (118 ± 2 vs. 91 ± 2; P < 0.001). Tourniquet inflation pressures were not significantly different between the groups. Tourniquet performance was excellent or good in all patients in both groups. Conclusions:Arterial occlusion pressure estimation or LOP determination methods to set the tourniquet inflation pressure with hypotensive anesthesia can provide effective minimal inflation pressure and satisfactory surgical field for upper extremity surgeries without tourniquet-related complications.
| S-EPMC7353217 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Recent publications have stated that the blood pressure (BP) measurement technique used in SPRINT (Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial) was unattended. However, the SPRINT protocol does not address the issue of attendance. A survey was conducted immediately after SPRINT closeout visits were completed to inquire whether BP measurements were usually attended or unattended by staff. There were 4082 participants at 38 sites that measured BP after leaving the participant alone the entire time (always alone), 2247 at 25 sites that had personnel in the room the entire time (never alone), 1746 at 19 sites that left the participant alone only during the rest period (alone for rest), and 570 at 6 sites that left the participant alone only during the BP readings (alone for BP measurement). Similar systolic and diastolic BPs within randomized groups were noted during follow-up at the majority of visits in all 4 measurement categories. In the always alone and never alone categories, the intensive group had a similarly reduced risk for the primary outcome compared with the standard group (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% confidence interval, 0.51-0.76 and hazard ratio, 0.64; 95% confidence interval, 0.46-0.91, respectively; pairwise interaction P value, 0.88); risk was not significantly reduced for the intensive group in the smaller alone-for-rest and the alone-for-BP-measurement categories. Similar BP levels and cardiovascular disease risk reduction were observed in the intensive group in SPRINT participants whether the measurement technique used was primarily attended or unattended. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION:URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01206062.
| S-EPMC5967644 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundClinic-based blood pressure (BP) is a closely-tracked metric of health care quality, but is prone to inaccuracy and measurement imprecision. Recent guidelines have advocated for automated office blood pressure (AOBP) devices to improve clinic-based BP assessments.MethodsPatients from a single hypertension clinic underwent a 3-day evaluation that included a 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM), 2 manual clinic-based BP measurements (over 2 visits), and an unattended AOBP measurement (single visit). All measurements were compared to the average wake-time systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) from ABPM.ResultsAmong 103 patients (mean age 57.3 ± 14.8 years, 51% women, 29% black) the average wake-time SBP was 131.3 ± 12.3 mm Hg and DBP was 78.3 ± 9.2 mm Hg. The average of 2 manual BPs was significantly higher than wake-time ABPM with mean differences of 5.5 mm Hg (P < 0.001) for SBP and 2.7 mm Hg (P = 0.002) for DBP. In contrast, the averages of the last 2 AOBP measurements did not significantly differ from ABPM with mean differences of 1.6 mm Hg (P = 0.21) for SBP and -0.5 mm Hg (P = 0.62) for DBP. The estimated prevalence of SBP ≥ 140 or DBP ≥ 90 mm Hg based on wake-time ABPM was 27.2% vs. 49.5% based on the average of 2 manual measurements (difference 22.3%; P < 0.001) and 31.1% based on the average of the last 2 AOBP measurements (difference 3.9%; P = 0.57).ConclusionsA single visit, unattended AOBP more precisely estimated BP and the prevalence of stage 2 and uncontrolled hypertension than even the average of 2 manual clinic visits, supporting guideline recommendations to use AOBP for clinic-based BP measurements.
| S-EPMC6931893 | biostudies-literature
Project description:American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines describe the perioperative evaluation as "a unique opportunity to identify patients with hypertension"; however, factors such as anticipatory stress or medication noncompliance may induce a bias toward higher blood pressure, leaving clinicians unsure about how to interpret preoperative hypertension. Information describing the relationship between preoperative intake blood pressure and primary care measurements could help anesthesiologists make primary care referrals for improved blood pressure control in an evidence-based fashion. We hypothesized that the preoperative examination provides a useful basis for initiating primary care blood pressure referral.We analyzed retrospective data on 2807 patients who arrived from home for surgery and who were subsequently evaluated within 6 months after surgery in the primary care center of the same institution. After descriptive analysis, we conducted multiple linear regression analysis to identify day-of-surgery (DOS) factors associated with subsequent primary care blood pressure. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive value of different blood pressure referral thresholds using both a single-measurement and a 2-stage screen incorporating recent preoperative and DOS measurements for identifying patients with subsequently elevated primary care blood pressure.DOS systolic blood pressure (SBP) was higher than subsequent primary care SBP by a mean bias of 5.5 mm Hg (95% limits of agreement + 43.8 to -32.8). DOS diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was higher than subsequent primary care DBP by a mean bias of 1.5 mm Hg (95% limits of agreement +13.0 to -10.0). Linear regression of DOS factors explained 19% of the variability in primary care SBP and 29% of the variability in DBP. Accounting for the observed bias, a 2-stage SBP referral screen requiring preoperative clinic SBP ?140 mm Hg and DOS SBP ?146 mm Hg had 95.9% estimated specificity (95% confidence interval [CI] 94.4 to 97.0) for identifying subsequent primary care SBP ?140 mm Hg and estimated sensitivity of 26.8% (95% CI 22.0 to 32.0). A similarly high specificity using a single DOS SBP required a threshold SBP ?160 mm Hg, for which estimated specificity was 95.2% (95% CI 94.2 to 96.1). For DBP, a presenting DOS DBP ?92 mm Hg had 95.7% specificity (95% CI 94.8 to 96.4) for subsequent primary care DBP ?90 mm Hg with a sensitivity of 18.8% (95% CI 14.4 to 24.0).A small bias toward higher DOS blood pressures relative to subsequent primary care measurements was observed. DOS factors predicted only a small proportion of the observed variation. Accounting for the observed bias, a 2-stage SBP threshold and a single-reading DBP threshold were highly specific though insensitive for identifying subsequent primary care blood pressure elevation.
| S-EPMC3282161 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Current office blood pressure measurement (OBPM) is often not executed according to guidelines and cannot prevent the white-coat effect. Serial, automated, oscillometric OBPM has the potential to overcome both these problems. We therefore developed a 30-minute OBPM method that we compared with daytime ambulatory blood pressure.Patients referred to a primary care diagnostic center for 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) had their blood pressure measured using the same validated ABPM device for both ABPM and 30-minute OBPMs. During 30-minute OBPM, blood pressure was measured automatically every 5 minutes with the patient sitting alone in a quiet room. The mean 30-minute OBPM (based on t = 5 to t = 30 minutes) was compared with mean daytime ABPM using paired t tests and the approach described by Bland and Altman on method comparison.We analyzed data from 84 patients (mean age 57 years; 61% female). Systolic and diastolic blood pressures differed from 0 to 2 mm Hg (95% confidence interval, -2 to 2 mm Hg and from 0 to 3 mm Hg) between mean 30-minute OBPM and daytime ABPM, respectively. The limits of agreement were between -19 and 19 mm Hg for systolic and -10 and 13 mm Hg for diastolic blood pressures. Both 30-minute OBPM and daytime ABPM classified normotension, white-coat hypertension, masked hypertension, and sustained hypertension equally.The 30-minute OBPM appears to agree well with daytime ABPM and has the potential to detect white-coat and masked hypertension. This finding makes 30-minute OBPM a promising new method to determine blood pressure during diagnosis and follow-up of patients with elevated blood pressures.
| S-EPMC3056860 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Accurate assessment of blood pressure (BP) is the cornerstone of hypertension management. The objectives of this study were to quantify the effect of medical personnel presence during BP measurement by automated oscillometric BP (AOBP) and to compare resting office BP by AOBP to daytime average BP by 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). This study is a prospective randomized cross-over trial, conducted in a referral population. Patients underwent measurements of casual and resting office BP by AOBP. Resting BP was measured as either unattended (patient alone in the room during resting and measurements) or as partially attended (nurse present in the room during measurements) immediately prior to and after 24-h ABPM. The primary outcome was the effect of unattended 5-min rest preceding AOBP assessment as the difference between casual and resting BP measured by the Omron HEM 907XL. Ninety patients consented and 78 completed the study. The mean difference between the casual and Omron unattended systolic BP was 7.0 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] 4.5, 9.5). There was no significant difference between partially attended and unattended resting office systolic BP. Resting office BP (attended and partially attended) underestimated daytime systolic BP load from 24-h ABPM. The presence or absence of medical personnel does not impact casual office BP which is higher than resting office AOBP. The requirement for unattended rest may be dropped if logistically challenging. Casual and resting office BP readings by AOBP do not capture the complexity of information provided by the 24-h ABPM.
| S-EPMC8678755 | biostudies-literature