HOME SELF-MONITORING OF BLOOD-PRESSURE - IS FULLY AUTOMATED OSCILLOMETRIC TECHNIQUE AS GOOD AS CONVENTIONAL STETHOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE

Citation
Gs. Stergiou et al., HOME SELF-MONITORING OF BLOOD-PRESSURE - IS FULLY AUTOMATED OSCILLOMETRIC TECHNIQUE AS GOOD AS CONVENTIONAL STETHOSCOPIC TECHNIQUE, American journal of hypertension, 10(4), 1997, pp. 428-433
Citations number
29
Categorie Soggetti
Peripheal Vascular Diseas
ISSN journal
08957061
Volume
10
Issue
4
Year of publication
1997
Part
1
Pages
428 - 433
Database
ISI
SICI code
0895-7061(1997)10:4<428:HSOB-I>2.0.ZU;2-G
Abstract
Home blood pressure (HBP) measurement is becoming increasingly popular as an additional source of information for the practicing physician. Whether HBP measured with a fully automated oscillometric device (oHBP ) is more reliable than HBP measured with an aneroid sphygmomanometer and a stethoscope (sHBP) remains unclear. We compared sHBP with oHBP u sing as a reference method daytime ambulatory blood pressure (ABP), as this is believed to be a better index of an individual's overall leve l of pressure. Forty-six hypertensive patients measuring HBP with aner oid devices were retrained by a standard 30 min protocol that included training in the technique of measurement, checking patients' devices, and testing patients' performance in stethoscopic measurement. Patien ts were randomized to measure for 2 weeks either sHBP using their own calibrated aneroid devices or oHBP using a validated fully automated o scillometric device (Omron HEM-705CP). Then 24 h ABP monitoring was pe rformed (SpaceLabs 90207) and patients crossed over for a second 2 wee k period by using the alternative HBP measurement technique. Mean sHBP was not different from mean oHBP, and there was a close correlation b etween them (r = 0.82/0.76 for systolic/diastolic BP, P <.001). Daytim e ABP was not different from oHBP or sHBP and was closely related to b oth of them (oHBP, r = 0.59/0.72 systolic/diastolic BP, P <.001; sHBP, 0.50/0.65, P <.001). Age was significantly related with diastolic ABP -sHBP difference (r = 0.33, P <.05). These results suggest that HBP me asured with validated fully automated oscillometric devices is equally reliable in predicting average ABP as that measured with calibrated a neroid sphygmomanometers used by very carefully trained patients. In c linical practice, HBP monitoring by using reliable automated devices i s probably more feasible than to achieve a high standard of stethoscop ic HBP measuring technique. (C) 1997 American Journal of Hypertension, Ltd.