Blood pressure monitoring · 2007
Evaluation and effects of the Omron 725 CIC device for measuring blood pressure in a hypertension clinic.
Клиническое исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fonseca-Reyes Salvador, Cervantes-Munguía Ramón, de Alba-García Javier García, Parra-Carrillo José Z, López-Maldonado Francisco, Montes-Casillas Mayra
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: We compared the Omron 725 CIC device (Omron Healthcare Inc., Vernon Hills, Illinois, USA), which is designed to register the blood pressure on the arm, with a mercury sphygmomanometer. In addition, we evaluated the possible impact that this device might have on the decisions made in a hypertension clinic.
METHODS: Patients (n=183) older than 18 years (range 18-84 years) with a wide range of systolic (87-197 mmHg) and diastolic (48-108 mmHg) blood pressures were included. Some of the standards of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation and of the British Hypertension Society were used to evaluate the results of the automated device in clinical practice.
RESULTS: Using Bland-Altman analysis, an underestimation of both measures was observed with the automated Omron 725 CIC device; the systolic pressure was 3.6+/-8.8 mmHg too low with a very wide range of -13.7 to 20.9 and the diastolic pressure was also 4.4+/-6.3 mmHg too low with a range of -8.1 to 16.9. Clinical decisions could have been changed in 24 of the 116 hypertensive patients (20.6%) if the readings of the automated device had been used instead of using the readings of a mercury sphygmomanometer. These could have included modifying the dosage or changing the medicine used.
CONCLUSION: The blood pressure measurements by Omron 725 CIC are different from those of blood pressure readings taken with a mercury sphygmomanometer and this could affect clinical decisions in the diagnosis and follow-up of a hypertensive patient in an office environment.
METHODS: Patients (n=183) older than 18 years (range 18-84 years) with a wide range of systolic (87-197 mmHg) and diastolic (48-108 mmHg) blood pressures were included. Some of the standards of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation and of the British Hypertension Society were used to evaluate the results of the automated device in clinical practice.
RESULTS: Using Bland-Altman analysis, an underestimation of both measures was observed with the automated Omron 725 CIC device; the systolic pressure was 3.6+/-8.8 mmHg too low with a very wide range of -13.7 to 20.9 and the diastolic pressure was also 4.4+/-6.3 mmHg too low with a range of -8.1 to 16.9. Clinical decisions could have been changed in 24 of the 116 hypertensive patients (20.6%) if the readings of the automated device had been used instead of using the readings of a mercury sphygmomanometer. These could have included modifying the dosage or changing the medicine used.
CONCLUSION: The blood pressure measurements by Omron 725 CIC are different from those of blood pressure readings taken with a mercury sphygmomanometer and this could affect clinical decisions in the diagnosis and follow-up of a hypertensive patient in an office environment.