Cargando…
Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review
BACKGROUND: To interpret blood pressure (BP) data appropriately, healthcare providers need to be knowledgeable of the factors that can potentially impact the accuracy of BP measurement and contribute to variability between measurements. METHODS: A systematic review of studies quantifying BP measurem...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5278896/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27977471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000001197 |
_version_ | 1782502685274013696 |
---|---|
author | Kallioinen, Noa Hill, Andrew Horswill, Mark S. Ward, Helen E. Watson, Marcus O. |
author_facet | Kallioinen, Noa Hill, Andrew Horswill, Mark S. Ward, Helen E. Watson, Marcus O. |
author_sort | Kallioinen, Noa |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: To interpret blood pressure (BP) data appropriately, healthcare providers need to be knowledgeable of the factors that can potentially impact the accuracy of BP measurement and contribute to variability between measurements. METHODS: A systematic review of studies quantifying BP measurement inaccuracy. Medline and CINAHL databases were searched for empirical articles and systematic reviews published up to June 2015. Empirical articles were included if they reported a study that was relevant to the measurement of adult patients’ resting BP at the upper arm in a clinical setting (e.g. ward or office); identified a specific source of inaccuracy; and quantified its effect. Reference lists and reviews were searched for additional articles. RESULTS: A total of 328 empirical studies were included. They investigated 29 potential sources of inaccuracy, categorized as relating to the patient, device, procedure or observer. Significant directional effects were found for 27; however, for some, the effects were inconsistent in direction. Compared with true resting BP, significant effects of individual sources ranged from −23.6 to +33 mmHg SBP and −14 to +23 mmHg DBP. CONCLUSION: A single BP value outside the expected range should be interpreted with caution and not taken as a definitive indicator of clinical deterioration. Where a measurement is abnormally high or low, further measurements should be taken and averaged. Wherever possible, BP values should be recorded graphically within ranges. This may reduce the impact of sources of inaccuracy and reduce the scope for misinterpretations based on small, likely erroneous or misleading, changes. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5278896 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-52788962017-02-08 Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review Kallioinen, Noa Hill, Andrew Horswill, Mark S. Ward, Helen E. Watson, Marcus O. J Hypertens Reviews BACKGROUND: To interpret blood pressure (BP) data appropriately, healthcare providers need to be knowledgeable of the factors that can potentially impact the accuracy of BP measurement and contribute to variability between measurements. METHODS: A systematic review of studies quantifying BP measurement inaccuracy. Medline and CINAHL databases were searched for empirical articles and systematic reviews published up to June 2015. Empirical articles were included if they reported a study that was relevant to the measurement of adult patients’ resting BP at the upper arm in a clinical setting (e.g. ward or office); identified a specific source of inaccuracy; and quantified its effect. Reference lists and reviews were searched for additional articles. RESULTS: A total of 328 empirical studies were included. They investigated 29 potential sources of inaccuracy, categorized as relating to the patient, device, procedure or observer. Significant directional effects were found for 27; however, for some, the effects were inconsistent in direction. Compared with true resting BP, significant effects of individual sources ranged from −23.6 to +33 mmHg SBP and −14 to +23 mmHg DBP. CONCLUSION: A single BP value outside the expected range should be interpreted with caution and not taken as a definitive indicator of clinical deterioration. Where a measurement is abnormally high or low, further measurements should be taken and averaged. Wherever possible, BP values should be recorded graphically within ranges. This may reduce the impact of sources of inaccuracy and reduce the scope for misinterpretations based on small, likely erroneous or misleading, changes. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2017-03 2016-12-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5278896/ /pubmed/27977471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000001197 Text en Copyright © 2017 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 |
spellingShingle | Reviews Kallioinen, Noa Hill, Andrew Horswill, Mark S. Ward, Helen E. Watson, Marcus O. Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title | Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title_full | Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title_fullStr | Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title_full_unstemmed | Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title_short | Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
title_sort | sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients’ resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review |
topic | Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5278896/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27977471 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000001197 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kallioinennoa sourcesofinaccuracyinthemeasurementofadultpatientsrestingbloodpressureinclinicalsettingsasystematicreview AT hillandrew sourcesofinaccuracyinthemeasurementofadultpatientsrestingbloodpressureinclinicalsettingsasystematicreview AT horswillmarks sourcesofinaccuracyinthemeasurementofadultpatientsrestingbloodpressureinclinicalsettingsasystematicreview AT wardhelene sourcesofinaccuracyinthemeasurementofadultpatientsrestingbloodpressureinclinicalsettingsasystematicreview AT watsonmarcuso sourcesofinaccuracyinthemeasurementofadultpatientsrestingbloodpressureinclinicalsettingsasystematicreview |