Display options
Cite
Mansoor K, Shahnawaz S, Rasool M, et al. Automated Versus Manual Blood Pressure Measurement: A Randomized Crossover Trial in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan: Are Third World Countries Ready for the Change?. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2016;4(3):404-409doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2016.076.
Mansoor, K., Shahnawaz, S., Rasool, M., Chaudhry, H., Ahuja, G., & Shahnawaz, S. (2016). Automated Versus Manual Blood Pressure Measurement: A Randomized Crossover Trial in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan: Are Third World Countries Ready for the Change?. Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences, 4(3), 404-409. https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2016.076
Mansoor, Kanaan, et al. "Automated Versus Manual Blood Pressure Measurement: A Randomized Crossover Trial in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan: Are Third World Countries Ready for the Change?." Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences vol. 4,3 (2016): 404-409. doi: https://doi.org/10.3889/oamjms.2016.076
Mansoor K, Shahnawaz S, Rasool M, Chaudhry H, Ahuja G, Shahnawaz S. Automated Versus Manual Blood Pressure Measurement: A Randomized Crossover Trial in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan: Are Third World Countries Ready for the Change?. Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2016 Sep 15;4(3):404-409. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2016.076. Epub 2016 Jul 27. PMID: 27703563; PMCID: PMC5042623.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Open Access Maced J Med Sci. 2016 Sep 15;4(3):404-409. doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2016.076. Epub 2016 Jul 27.

Automated Versus Manual Blood Pressure Measurement: A Randomized Crossover Trial in the Emergency Department of a Tertiary Care Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan: Are Third World Countries Ready for the Change?.

Open access Macedonian journal of medical sciences

Kanaan Mansoor, Saba Shahnawaz, Mariam Rasool, Huwad Chaudhry, Gul Ahuja, Sara Shahnawaz

Affiliations

  1. Dr. Ziauddin University Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
  2. Dialysis Unit, The Kidney Centre, Karachi, Pakistan.
  3. Sindh Government Hospital, Karachi, Pakistan.
  4. New Mehran Medical Centre, Karachi, Pakistan.

PMID: 27703563 PMCID: PMC5042623 DOI: 10.3889/oamjms.2016.076

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hypertension has proven to be a strong liability with 13.5% of all mortality worldwide being attributed to elevated blood pressures in 2001. An accurate blood pressure measurement lies at the crux of an appropriate diagnosis. Despite the mercury sphygmomanometer being the gold standard, the ongoing deliberation as to whether mercury sphygmomanometers should be replaced with the automated oscillometric devices stems from the risk mercury poses to the environment.

AIM: This study was performed to check the validity of automated oscillometric blood pressure measurements as compared to the manual blood pressure measurements in Karachi, Pakistan.

MATERIAL AND METHODS: Blood pressure was recorded in 200 individuals aged 15 and above using both, an automated oscillometric blood pressure device (Dinamap Procare 100) and a manual mercury sphygmomanometer concomitantly. Two nurses were assigned to each patient and the device, arm for taking the reading and nurses were randomly determined. SPSS version 20 was used for analysis. Mean and standard deviation of the systolic and diastolic measurements from each modality were compared to each other and P values of 0.05 or less were considered to be significant. Validation criteria of British Hypertension Society (BHS) and the US Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) were used.

RESULTS: Two hundred patients were included. The mean of the difference of systolic was 8.54 ± 9.38 while the mean of the difference of diastolic was 4.21 ± 7.88. Patients were further divided into three groups of different systolic blood pressure <= 120, > 120 to = 150 and > 150, their means were 6.27 ± 8.39 (p-value 0.175), 8.91 ± 8.96 (p-value 0.004) and 10.98 ± 10.49 (p-value 0.001) respectively. In our study 89 patients were previously diagnosed with hypertension; their difference of mean systolic was 9.43 ± 9.89 (p-value 0.000) and difference of mean diastolic was 4.26 ± 7.35 (p-value 0.000).

CONCLUSIONS: Systolic readings from a previously validated device are not reliable when used in the ER and they show a higher degree of incongruency and inaccuracy when they are used outside validation settings. Also, readings from the right arm tend to be more precise.

Keywords: Automated oscillometer; Sphygmomanometers; blood pressure

References

  1. Hypertension. 1998 May;31(5):1185-9 - PubMed
  2. Am J Hypertens. 1998 Feb;11(2):203-7 - PubMed
  3. BMJ. 2011 Feb 07;342:d286 - PubMed
  4. J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich). 2010 Jul 1;12(7):478-80 - PubMed
  5. Blood Press Monit. 2005 Oct;10(5):283-9 - PubMed
  6. Circ Res. 1983 Jul;53(1):96-104 - PubMed
  7. Cardiol Clin. 2010 Nov;28(4):571-86 - PubMed
  8. Anaesthesia. 1984 Mar;39(3):261-7 - PubMed
  9. Hypertension. 2005 Jan;45(1):142-61 - PubMed
  10. Int J Nurs Pract. 2008 Aug;14(4):296-302 - PubMed
  11. JAMA. 1995 Apr 19;273(15):1211-8 - PubMed
  12. BMJ. 2001 Mar 3;322(7285):531-6 - PubMed
  13. Hypertension. 2000 May;35(5):1032-6 - PubMed
  14. Lancet. 1983 Sep 24;2(8352):695-8 - PubMed
  15. J Clin Nurs. 2011 Mar;20(5-6):602-14 - PubMed
  16. Hypertension. 2000 Oct;36(4):484-8 - PubMed
  17. J Hypertens Suppl. 1995 Dec;13(4):S27-34 - PubMed
  18. Lancet. 2008 May 3;371(9623):1513-8 - PubMed
  19. N Engl J Med. 2010 Jan 7;362(1):56-65 - PubMed
  20. J Hum Hypertens. 2010 Jul;24(7):431-8 - PubMed
  21. Int J Nurs Pract. 2011 Oct;17(5):525-33 - PubMed
  22. Hypertension. 2007 Mar;49(3):389-400 - PubMed
  23. J Hypertens. 1994 Sep;12(9):1089-94 - PubMed
  24. Blood Press Monit. 2002 Feb;7(1):37-40 - PubMed
  25. Am J Hypertens. 2008 Mar;21(3):280-3 - PubMed
  26. Health Rep. 2010 Mar;21(1):37-46 - PubMed
  27. J Hypertens. 2009 Feb;27(2):280-6 - PubMed
  28. J Hypertens. 2003 May;21(5):821-48 - PubMed

Publication Types