Cargando…

WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry

Background: Smart devices that are able to measure blood pressure (BP) are valuable for hypertension or heart failure management using digital technology. Data regarding their diagnostic accuracy in comparison to standard noninvasive measurement in accordance to Riva-Rocci are sparse. This study com...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vaseekaran, Mathini, Kaese, Sven, Görlich, Dennis, Wiemer, Marcus, Samol, Alexander
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10650650/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37960576
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23218877
_version_ 1785135829349302272
author Vaseekaran, Mathini
Kaese, Sven
Görlich, Dennis
Wiemer, Marcus
Samol, Alexander
author_facet Vaseekaran, Mathini
Kaese, Sven
Görlich, Dennis
Wiemer, Marcus
Samol, Alexander
author_sort Vaseekaran, Mathini
collection PubMed
description Background: Smart devices that are able to measure blood pressure (BP) are valuable for hypertension or heart failure management using digital technology. Data regarding their diagnostic accuracy in comparison to standard noninvasive measurement in accordance to Riva-Rocci are sparse. This study compared a wearable watch-type oscillometric BP monitor (Omron HeartGuide), a wearable watch-type infrared BP monitor (Smart Wear), a conventional ambulatory BP monitor, and auscultatory sphygmomanometry. Methods: Therefore, 159 consecutive patients (84 male, 75 female, mean age 64.33 ± 16.14 years) performed observed single measurements with the smart device compared to auscultatory sphygmomanometry (n = 109) or multiple measurements during 24 h compared to a conventional ambulatory BP monitor on the upper arm (n = 50). The two BP monitoring devices were simultaneously worn on the same arm throughout the monitoring period. In a subgroup of 50 patients, single measurements were also performed with an additional infrared smart device. Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the difference and the mean of the oscillometric Omron HeartGuide and the conventional method for the single measurement was calculated for both systole (0.765) and diastole (0.732). This is exactly how the ICC was calculated for the individual mean values calculated over the 24 h long-term measurement of the individual patients for both systole (0.880) and diastole (0.829). The ICC between the infrared device and the conventional method was “bad” for SBP (0.329) and DBP (0.025). Therefore, no further long-term measurements were performed with the infrared device. Conclusion: The Omron HeartGuide device provided comparable BP values to the standard devices for single and long-term measurements. The infrared smart device failed to acquire valid measurement data.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10650650
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-106506502023-10-31 WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry Vaseekaran, Mathini Kaese, Sven Görlich, Dennis Wiemer, Marcus Samol, Alexander Sensors (Basel) Article Background: Smart devices that are able to measure blood pressure (BP) are valuable for hypertension or heart failure management using digital technology. Data regarding their diagnostic accuracy in comparison to standard noninvasive measurement in accordance to Riva-Rocci are sparse. This study compared a wearable watch-type oscillometric BP monitor (Omron HeartGuide), a wearable watch-type infrared BP monitor (Smart Wear), a conventional ambulatory BP monitor, and auscultatory sphygmomanometry. Methods: Therefore, 159 consecutive patients (84 male, 75 female, mean age 64.33 ± 16.14 years) performed observed single measurements with the smart device compared to auscultatory sphygmomanometry (n = 109) or multiple measurements during 24 h compared to a conventional ambulatory BP monitor on the upper arm (n = 50). The two BP monitoring devices were simultaneously worn on the same arm throughout the monitoring period. In a subgroup of 50 patients, single measurements were also performed with an additional infrared smart device. Results: The intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) between the difference and the mean of the oscillometric Omron HeartGuide and the conventional method for the single measurement was calculated for both systole (0.765) and diastole (0.732). This is exactly how the ICC was calculated for the individual mean values calculated over the 24 h long-term measurement of the individual patients for both systole (0.880) and diastole (0.829). The ICC between the infrared device and the conventional method was “bad” for SBP (0.329) and DBP (0.025). Therefore, no further long-term measurements were performed with the infrared device. Conclusion: The Omron HeartGuide device provided comparable BP values to the standard devices for single and long-term measurements. The infrared smart device failed to acquire valid measurement data. MDPI 2023-10-31 /pmc/articles/PMC10650650/ /pubmed/37960576 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23218877 Text en © 2023 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Vaseekaran, Mathini
Kaese, Sven
Görlich, Dennis
Wiemer, Marcus
Samol, Alexander
WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title_full WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title_fullStr WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title_full_unstemmed WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title_short WATCH-BPM—Comparison of a WATCH-Type Blood Pressure Monitor with a Conventional Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitor and Auscultatory Sphygmomanometry
title_sort watch-bpm—comparison of a watch-type blood pressure monitor with a conventional ambulatory blood pressure monitor and auscultatory sphygmomanometry
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10650650/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37960576
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s23218877
work_keys_str_mv AT vaseekaranmathini watchbpmcomparisonofawatchtypebloodpressuremonitorwithaconventionalambulatorybloodpressuremonitorandauscultatorysphygmomanometry
AT kaesesven watchbpmcomparisonofawatchtypebloodpressuremonitorwithaconventionalambulatorybloodpressuremonitorandauscultatorysphygmomanometry
AT gorlichdennis watchbpmcomparisonofawatchtypebloodpressuremonitorwithaconventionalambulatorybloodpressuremonitorandauscultatorysphygmomanometry
AT wiemermarcus watchbpmcomparisonofawatchtypebloodpressuremonitorwithaconventionalambulatorybloodpressuremonitorandauscultatorysphygmomanometry
AT samolalexander watchbpmcomparisonofawatchtypebloodpressuremonitorwithaconventionalambulatorybloodpressuremonitorandauscultatorysphygmomanometry