Kg. Lehmann et al., COMPARATIVE ACCURACY OF 3 AUTOMATED TECHNIQUES IN THE NONINVASIVE ESTIMATION OF CENTRAL BLOOD-PRESSURE IN MEN, The American journal of cardiology, 81(8), 1998, pp. 1004-1012
Automated devices have regularly replaced manual sphygmomanometry for
the determination of blood pressure not only in homes and clinics, but
also in emergency and critical care settings. Few studies exist that
correctly assess the accuracy of these devices, and even fewer that sp
ecifically compare commercially available units that rely on different
physiologic events for measurement. Six hundred pressure measurements
were obtained from 120 subjects using 1 of 3 randomly selected blood
pressure monitors. In addition, central arterial pressure measurements
were obtained simultaneously and directly from the ascending aorta of
each subject. Overall, these devices tended to overestimate diastolic
(+2.5 mm Hg, p <0.0001) and mean (+3.8 mm Hg, p < 0.0001) pressures,
but not systolic (+0.7 mm Hg, p = NS) pressure. Compared with the othe
r 2 devices, device I, relying on oscillometric detection, demonstrate
d a significantly smaller mean absolute error for diastolic pressure (
4.9 +/- 3.0 vs 7.0 +/- 4.8 and 6.2 +/- 5.3 mm Hg, p <0.0001) and mean
pressure (4.0 +/- 3.2 vs 7.8 +/- 5.9 and 8.6 +/- 7.5 mm Hg, p <0.0001)
, and a trend toward smaller error with systolic pressure (6.8 +/- 6.5
vs 7.3 +/- 6.8 and 8.0 +/- 5.6 mm Hg, p = 0.19). Clinically significa
nt (+/-10 mm Hg) errors were common with each device (24.8% overall),
but serious (+/-20 mm Hg) errors were unusual (3.2%) and did not occur
at all with device I during diastolic and mean pressure measurement.
All of the devices tested could be expected to perform satisfactorily
in most clinical settings provided that an average error of 4.0 to 8.6
mm Hg is tolerable. This level of accuracy typically extended through
out the range of pressures anticipated in most noncritical clinical si
tuations. As implemented in the devices tested, noninvasive measuremen
t by oscillometry with stepped deflation is more accurate than automat
ed auscultation. (C) 1998 by Excerpta Medica, Inc.