Two Doppler blood pressure devices and 2 oscillometric blood pressure devices failed American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine validation in conscious dogs.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the accuracy of 2 Doppler and 2 oscillometric devices to invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements in conscious dogs at 2 cuff locations using the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (ACVIM) validation criteria.

METHODS

8 Beagles had dorsal pedal arterial catheters placed under anesthesia on November 13 and 18, 2024. Once conscious, paired non-IBP and IBP measurements were collected at the tail and forelimb for all devices. Bias, SD, percentage of values within 10 and 20 mm Hg of IBP, correlation coefficients, and limits of agreement were calculated for each paired measurement.

RESULTS

No device met ACVIM validation criteria at either cuff location. Devices performed better at the tail compared to the forelimb. Doppler devices performed better than oscillometric devices for systolic blood pressure. Oscillometric devices performed best for mean blood pressure (MBP). The MBP measured by the multiparameter monitor at the tail showed the most favorable overall performance, including a bias of 1.75 mm Hg (SD, 8.98); 82% and 96% of measurements within 10 and 20 mm Hg of IBP, respectively; and limits of agreement of -15 to 19. The correlation coefficient threshold was not met by any device.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the devices were validated against IBP in conscious adult dogs using ACVIM criteria. Tail placement improved performance across devices. Oscillometric devices appeared more reliable for MBP, whereas Doppler devices provided more reliable systolic blood pressure measurements.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Clinicians should interpret NIBP cautiously in conscious dogs.