Hybrid Optical Unobtrusive Blood Pressure Measurements.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Zhang G
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5539707 | biostudies-other | 2017 Jul
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:OBJECTIVE:The objective of this study was to validate the accuracy of beat-to-beat measurements with those taken with an aneroid sphygmomanometer by auscultatory method. A secondary aim was to explore differences between auscultatory and beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) with daytime ambulatory BP measurements. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS:A total of 46 participants, comprising 21 males, aged 47±13 years, height 171±8.5?cm and weight 82±16.8?kg attended the Exercise Physiology Laboratory at the University of New England (Armidale, New South Wales, Australia). During the visit, participants had their BP - systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) - measured using auscultatory methods and a Finometer. An ambulatory BP monitor was fitted during the same visit and worn for a minimum of 12?h. RESULTS:Auscultatory measurements were slightly higher than beat-to-beat for both SBP and DBP. There was no difference between auscultatory and beat-to-beat SBP with a mean difference of 0.23?mmHg (P=0.87). There were disparities between auscultatory and beat-to-beat DBP, with a mean difference of 4.82?mmHg (P<0.01). Daytime ambulatory BP was higher than both auscultatory and beat-to-beat measurements for both SBP and DBP, with P less than 0.001 for all measures. CONCLUSION:There was a high level of reliability in the beat-to-beat SBP with that seen by auscultatory; however, there were disparities in DBP measurements using the same devices, which raise concerns over the accuracy of beat-to-beat DBP. Ambulatory systolic and diastolic measures were higher than beat-to-beat and auscultatory; however, they may be more suitable for monitoring diurnal changes in BP, depending upon the research model.
| S-EPMC6314505 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC10713445 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ObjectiveTo compare blood pressure (BP) in tonometric radial artery recordings during passive head-up tilt with ambulatory recordings and evaluate possible laboratory cutoff values for hypertension.MethodsLaboratory BP and ambulatory BP were recorded in normotensive (n = 69), unmedicated hypertensive (n = 190), and medicated hypertensive (n = 151) subjects.ResultsMean age was 50.2 years, BMI 27.7 kg/m 2 , ambulatory daytime BP 139/87 mmHg, and 276 were male (65%). As supine-to-upright changes in SBP ranged from -52 to +30 mmHg, and in DBP from -21 to +32 mmHg, the mean values of BP supine and upright measurements were compared with ambulatory BP. The mean(supine+upright) systolic laboratory BP was corresponding to ambulatory level (difference +1 mmHg), while mean(supine+upright) DBP was 4 mmHg lower ( P < 0.05) than ambulatory value. Correlograms indicated that laboratory 136/82 mmHg corresponded to ambulatory 135/85 mmHg. When compared with ambulatory 135/85 mmHg, the sensitivity and specificity of laboratory 136/82 mmHg to define hypertension were 71.5% and 77.3% for SBP, and 71.7% and 72.8%, for DBP, respectively. The laboratory cutoff 136/82 mmHg classified 311/410 subjects similarly to ambulatory BP as normotensive or hypertensive, 68 were hypertensive only in ambulatory, while 31 were hypertensive only in laboratory measurements.ConclusionBP responses to upright posture were variable. When compared with ambulatory BP, mean(supine+upright) laboratory cutoff 136/82 mmHg classified 76% of subjects similarly as normotensive or hypertensive. In the remaining 24% the discordant results may be attributed to white-coat or masked hypertension, or higher physical activity during out-of-office recordings.
| S-EPMC10309093 | biostudies-literature
Project description: Not available
| S-EPMC9531449 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Purpose of reviewAutomated office blood pressure (AOBP) measurements may provide more accurate estimation of blood pressure (BP) than manual office blood pressure (MOBP) measurements. This systematic review investigated the diagnostic performance of AOBP and MOBP using ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) as reference. Several databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and China Academic Journals were searched. Data were extracted, double-checked by two investigators, and were analysed using a random effects model.Recent findingsA total of 26 observational studies were included. The mean systolic/diastolic BP obtained by AOBP was not significantly different from that obtained by ABPM. The sensitivity and specificity of AOBP to detect elevated BP were approximately 70%. Fewer participants had white-coat hypertension on AOBP measurement than on MOBP measurement (7% versus 14%); however, about 13% had masked hypertension on AOBP measurement. The width of the limit of agreement comparing (i) AOBP and ABPM and (ii) MOBP and ABPM was comparable. AOBP may reduce the rate of the observed white-coat effect but undermine masked hypertension. The current recommendation, however, is limited by the absence of high-quality studies and the high heterogeneity of our results. More high-quality studies using different AOBP machines and in different population are therefore needed.
| S-EPMC7810619 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundCurrent guidelines recommend treating hypertension in patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) to reduce the risk of cardiac events and stroke, but the effect of reducing blood pressure on lower extremity PAD events is largely unknown. We investigated the association of blood pressure with lower extremity PAD events using data from the ALLHAT trial (Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial).MethodsALLHAT investigated the effect of different antihypertensive medication classes (chlorthalidone, amlodipine, lisinopril, or doxazosin) on cardiovascular events. With the use of these data, the primary outcome in our analysis was time to first lower extremity PAD event, defined as PAD-related hospitalization, procedures, medical treatment, or PAD-related death. Given the availability of longitudinal standardized blood pressure measurements, we analyzed systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and pulse pressure as time-varying categorical variables (reference categories 120-129 mm Hg for SBP, 70-79 mm Hg for DBP, and 45-54 mm Hg for pulse pressure) in separate models. We used extended Cox regression with death as a competing risk to calculate the association of each blood pressure component with PAD events, and report the results as subdistribution hazard ratios and 95% CIs.ResultsThe present analysis included 33 357 patients with an average age of 67.4 years, 53.1% men, 59.7% white race, and 36.2% with diabetes mellitus. The median baseline blood pressure was 146/84 mm Hg. Participants were followed for a median of 4.3 (interquartile range, 3.6-5.3) years, during which time 1489 (4.5%) had a lower extremity PAD event, and 4148 (12.4%) died. In models adjusted for demographic and clinical characteristics, SBP <120 mm Hg was associated with a 26% (CI, 5%-52%; P=0.015) higher hazard and SBP≥160 mm Hg was associated with a 21% (CI, 0%-48%; P=0.050) higher hazard for a PAD event, in comparison with SBP 120 to 129 mm Hg. In contrast, lower, but not higher, DBP was associated with a higher hazard of PAD events: for DBP <60 mm Hg (hazard ratio, 1.72; CI, 1.38-2.16). Pulse pressure had a U-shaped association with PAD events.ConclusionsIn this reanalysis of data from ALLHAT, we found a higher rate of lower extremity PAD events with higher and lower SBP and pulse pressure and with lower DBP. Given the recent revised blood pressure guidelines advocating lower SBP targets for overall cardiovascular risk reduction, further refinement of optimal blood pressure targets specific to PAD is needed.Clinical trial registrationURL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00000542.
| S-EPMC6202170 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn longitudinal research studies with follow-up examinations, the devices used to measure phenotypes may change over time. When a device change occurs, the two devices should be calibrated to each other to ensure that measurements are comparable. This paper details the Jackson Heart Study (JHS) blood pressure (BP) comparability study.Participants and methodsDuring its second clinic exam (2005-2008), the JHS switched from a random-zero sphygmomanometer (RZS) BP measurement device to an oscillometric device (OD). During this exam, BP measurements from both an RZS and an OD were taken simultaneously in 2117 participants for the purpose of calibration. Five methods for calibrating systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) were considered: ignoring the change, ordinary least squares regression, adding the average difference, Deming regression, and robust regression.ResultsUsing the RZS and OD, the mean (SD) SBP was 125.5 (19.2) and 126.5 (19.9), respectively, and the mean (SD) DBP was 76.4 (10.6) and 74.0 (11.0), respectively. The correlation between RZS and the OD was 0.90 for SBP and 0.80 for DBP. The prevalence of high BP and hypertension and associations with albuminuria were similar when applying each of the five calibration methods. Robust regression was chosen for calibration, giving the following equations:(Equation is included in full-text article.)These equations had a higher R statistic than using calibration equations from the Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults Study and the Heinz Nixdorf Recall Study.ConclusionsThe JHS BP data have been calibrated using the above equations for use in future analyses.
| S-EPMC7225013 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Home blood pressure (BP) monitoring serves as a practical method to detect changes in BP instead of ambulatory BP monitoring in hemodialysis patients. To evaluate the relationship of reduction in home BP compared to interdialytic ambulatory BP measurements we analyzed the data from the dry-weight reduction in hypertensive hemodialysis patients (DRIP) trial in which 100 patients had their dry weight probed based on clinical sign and symptoms and 50 patients served as controls. We measured home BP 3 times a day for 1 week using a validated oscillometric monitor on 3 occasions at 4-week intervals after randomization. Changes from baseline in home, predialysis BP and postdialysis BP were compared to interdialytic 44-hour ambulatory BP. Home and ambulatory BP monitoring was available in 141 of 150 (94%) patients. Predialysis systolic BP was not as sensitive as ambulatory BP in detecting change in BP with dry-weight reduction. Whereas postdialysis BP was capable of detecting an improvement in systolic BP in response to probing dry weight, by itself it does not provide evidence that change in postdialysis BP persists over the interdialytic period. Home BP reliably detected changes in ambulatory BP, albeit with less sensitivity at 4 weeks. However, at 4 and at 8 weeks, changes in home systolic BP were most strongly related to changes in interdialytic ambulatory systolic BP compared to predialysis and postdialysis BP. The reproducibility of BP measurements followed the order home > ambulatory >> predialysis > postdialysis. These data provide support for the use of home BP monitoring for the management of hypertension in hemodialysis patients.
| S-EPMC2786027 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The authors developed and validated a diagnostic algorithm using the optimal upper and lower cut-off values of office and home BP at which ambulatory BP measurements need to be applied. Patients presenting with high BP (≥140/90 mm Hg) at the outpatient clinic were referred to measure office, home, and ambulatory BP. Office and home BP were divided into hypertension, intermediate (requiring diagnosis using ambulatory BP), and normotension zones. The upper and lower BP cut-off levels of intermediate zone were determined corresponding to a level of 95% specificity and 95% sensitivity for detecting daytime ambulatory hypertension by using the receiver operator characteristic curve. A diagnostic algorithm using three methods, OBP-ABP: office BP measurement and subsequent ambulatory BP measurements if office BP is intermediate zone; OBP-HBP-ABP: office BP, subsequent home BP measurement if office BP is within intermediate zone and subsequent ambulatory BP measurement if home BP is within intermediate zone; and HBP-ABP: home BP measurement and subsequent ambulatory BP measurements if home BP is within intermediate zone, were developed and validated. In the development population (n = 256), the developed algorithm yielded better diagnostic accuracies than 75.8% (95%CI 70.1-80.9) for office BP alone and 76.2% (95%CI 70.5-81.3) for home BP alone as follows: 96.5% (95%CI: 93.4-98.4) for OBP-ABP, 93.4% (95%CI: 89.6-96.1) for OBP-HBP-ABP, and 94.9% (95%CI: 91.5-97.3%) for HBP-ABP. In the validation population (n = 399), the developed algorithm showed similarly improved diagnostic accuracy. The developed algorithm applying ambulatory BP measurement to the intermediate zone of office and home BP improves the diagnostic accuracy for hypertension.
| S-EPMC8630611 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBlood pressure (BP) measurement error may lead to under- or overtreatment of hypertension. One common source of error is terminal digit preference, most often a terminal digit of "0." The objective was to evaluate national trends in terminal digit preference in office BP measurements among adults with treated hypertension.MethodsData were from IQVIA's National Disease and Therapeutic Index, a nationally representative, serial cross-sectional survey of office-based physicians. The analysis included office visits from 2015 to 2019 among adults aged ≥18 years receiving antihypertensive treatment. Annual trends were examined in the percent of systolic and diastolic BP measurements ending in zero by patient sex, age, and race/ethnicity, physician specialty, and first or subsequent hypertension treatment visit.ResultsFrom 2015 to 2019, there were ~60 million hypertension treatment visits annually (unweighted N: 5,585-9,085). There was a decrease in the percent of visits with systolic (41.7%-37.7%) or diastolic (42.7%-37.8%) BP recordings ending in zero. Trends were similar by patient characteristics. However, a greater proportion of measurements ended in zero among patients aged ≥80 (vs. 15-59 or 60-79) years, first (vs. subsequent) treatment visits, visits to cardiologists (vs. primary care physicians), and visits with systolic BP ≥140 or diastolic BP ≥90 (vs. <140/90) mm Hg.ConclusionsDespite modest improvement, terminal digit preference remains a common problem in office BP measurement in the United States. Without bias, 10%-20% of measurements are expected to end in zero. Reducing digit preference is a priority for improving BP measurement accuracy and hypertension management.
| S-EPMC8628654 | biostudies-literature