Dataset Information

Manual or automated sphygmomanometer? A historical cohort to quantify measurement bias in blood pressure recording.

ABSTRACT: The authors aimed to quantify end-digit and threshold biases in blood pressure (BP) measurement with manual and digital sphygmomanometers. In a 3-year follow-up, end-digit and threshold biases were investigated and a new index, called the deviation index, was used to quantify measurement bias. The distribution of systolic and diastolic BPs became close to normal after implementation of digital sphygmomanometers. The appearance of zero end digits decreased from 97% to 30% (P<.0001). The deviation index decreased from 97% to 20% (P<.0001). Mean systolic and diastolic BPs increased immediately after implementation of automated sphygmomanometers (124.22±0.83 vs 132.90±0.78 and 74.38±0.50 vs 80.43±0.51, respectively; P<.0001 for both) but showed a linear decreasing trend during follow-up (systolic -3.59 mm Hg per year; 95% confidence interval, -5.57 to -1.61 [P<.0001]; diastolic: -2.52 mm Hg per year; 95% confidence interval, -3.78 to -1.26 [P<.0001]). Threshold bias decreased from 12.94% to 6.68% (P<.0001). Replacing manual sphygmomanometers with digital devices decreased end-digit and threshold biases in BP measurement. The deviation index can be used to quantify the magnitude of measurement bias.

SUBMITTER: Nargesi AA

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8031494 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurement involves recording several blood pressure (BP) readings using a fully automated oscillometric sphygmomanometer with the patient resting alone in a quiet place. Although several studies have shown AOBP measurement to be more accurate than routine office BP measurement and not subject to a "white coat effect," the cumulative evidence has not yet been systematically reviewed.ObjectiveTo perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to examine the association between AOBP and office BP readings measured in routine clinical practice and in research studies, and ambulatory BP recorded during awake hours, as the latter is a standard for predicting future cardiovascular events.Data sourcesThe MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched from 2003 to April 25, 2018.Study selectionStudies on systolic and diastolic BP measurement by AOBP in comparison with awake ambulatory BP, routine office BP, and research BP measurements were included if they contained 30 patients or more.Data extraction and synthesisStudy characteristics were abstracted independently and random effects meta-analyses and meta-regressions were conducted.Main outcomes and measuresPooled mean differences (95% CI) of systolic and diastolic BP between types of BP measurement.ResultsData were compiled from 31 articles comprising 9279 participants (4736 men and 4543 women). In samples with systolic AOBP of 130 mm Hg or more, routine office and research systolic BP readings were substantially higher than AOBP readings, with a pooled mean difference of 14.5 mm Hg (95% CI, 11.8-17.2 mm Hg; n = 9; I2 = 94.3%; P < .001) for routine office systolic BP readings and 7.0 mm Hg (95% CI, 4.9-9.1 mm Hg; n = 9; I2 = 85.7%; P < .001) for research systolic BP readings. Systolic awake ambulatory BP and AOBP readings were similar, with a pooled mean difference of 0.3 mm Hg (95% CI, -1.1 to 1.7 mm Hg; n = 19; I2 = 90%; P < .001).Conclusions and relevanceAutomated office blood pressure readings, only when recorded properly with the patient sitting alone in a quiet place, are more accurate than office BP readings in routine clinical practice and are similar to awake ambulatory BP readings, with mean AOBP being devoid of any white coat effect. There has been some reluctance among physicians to adopt this technique because of uncertainty about its advantages compared with more traditional methods of recording BP during an office visit. Based on the evidence, AOBP should now be the preferred method for recording BP in routine clinical practice.

Dataset Information

Manual or automated sphygmomanometer? A historical cohort to quantify measurement bias in blood pressure recording.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets