Cargando…

Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock

BACKGROUND: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a “gold standard” in critically ill cardiac patients, the non-invasive BP is still widely used, at least at the initiation of medical care. The erroneous interpretation of BP can lead to clinical errors. We therefore inve...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Seidlerová, Jitka, Tůmová, Pavlína, Rokyta, Richard, Hromadka, Milan
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6582540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31215405
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9
_version_ 1783428344034885632
author Seidlerová, Jitka
Tůmová, Pavlína
Rokyta, Richard
Hromadka, Milan
author_facet Seidlerová, Jitka
Tůmová, Pavlína
Rokyta, Richard
Hromadka, Milan
author_sort Seidlerová, Jitka
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a “gold standard” in critically ill cardiac patients, the non-invasive BP is still widely used, at least at the initiation of medical care. The erroneous interpretation of BP can lead to clinical errors. We therefore investigated the agreement of both methods with respect to some common clinical situation. METHODS: We included 85 patients hospitalized for cardiogenic shock. We measured BP every 6 h for the first 72 h of hospitalization, in all patients. Each set of BP measurements included two invasive (invBP), two auscultatory (auscBP), and two oscillometric (oscBP) BP measurements. InvBP was considered as a gold standard. Mean non-invasive arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated as (diastolic pressure + (pulse pressure ÷ 3)). We used Bland-Altman analysis and we calculated concordance correlation coefficients to assess agreement between different BP methods. RESULTS: We obtained 967 sets of BP measurements. AuscMAP and oscMAP were on average only 0.4 ± 8.2 and 1.8 ± 8.5 mmHg higher than invMAP, respectively. On the other hand, auscSBP and oscSBP were on average − 6.1 ± 11.4 and − 4.1 ± 9.8 mmHg lower than invSBP, respectively. However, the mean differences and variability for systolic and diastolic BP variability were large; the 2 standard deviation differences were ± 24 and 18 mmHg. In hypotension, non-invasive BP tended to be higher than invBP while the opposite was true for high BP values. Clinical conditions associated with hypotension generally worsened the accuracy of non-invasive MAP. CONCLUSIONS: Mean arterial pressure measured non-invasively appears to be in good agreement with invasive MAP in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock. Several clinical associated with hypotension can affect accuracy of non-invasive measurement. Auscultatory and oscillometric measurements had similar accuracy even in patients with arrhythmia. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6582540
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-65825402019-06-26 Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock Seidlerová, Jitka Tůmová, Pavlína Rokyta, Richard Hromadka, Milan BMC Cardiovasc Disord Research Article BACKGROUND: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a “gold standard” in critically ill cardiac patients, the non-invasive BP is still widely used, at least at the initiation of medical care. The erroneous interpretation of BP can lead to clinical errors. We therefore investigated the agreement of both methods with respect to some common clinical situation. METHODS: We included 85 patients hospitalized for cardiogenic shock. We measured BP every 6 h for the first 72 h of hospitalization, in all patients. Each set of BP measurements included two invasive (invBP), two auscultatory (auscBP), and two oscillometric (oscBP) BP measurements. InvBP was considered as a gold standard. Mean non-invasive arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated as (diastolic pressure + (pulse pressure ÷ 3)). We used Bland-Altman analysis and we calculated concordance correlation coefficients to assess agreement between different BP methods. RESULTS: We obtained 967 sets of BP measurements. AuscMAP and oscMAP were on average only 0.4 ± 8.2 and 1.8 ± 8.5 mmHg higher than invMAP, respectively. On the other hand, auscSBP and oscSBP were on average − 6.1 ± 11.4 and − 4.1 ± 9.8 mmHg lower than invSBP, respectively. However, the mean differences and variability for systolic and diastolic BP variability were large; the 2 standard deviation differences were ± 24 and 18 mmHg. In hypotension, non-invasive BP tended to be higher than invBP while the opposite was true for high BP values. Clinical conditions associated with hypotension generally worsened the accuracy of non-invasive MAP. CONCLUSIONS: Mean arterial pressure measured non-invasively appears to be in good agreement with invasive MAP in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock. Several clinical associated with hypotension can affect accuracy of non-invasive measurement. Auscultatory and oscillometric measurements had similar accuracy even in patients with arrhythmia. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2019-06-18 /pmc/articles/PMC6582540/ /pubmed/31215405 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9 Text en © The Author(s). 2019 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research Article
Seidlerová, Jitka
Tůmová, Pavlína
Rokyta, Richard
Hromadka, Milan
Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title_full Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title_fullStr Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title_full_unstemmed Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title_short Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
title_sort factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
topic Research Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6582540/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31215405
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9
work_keys_str_mv AT seidlerovajitka factorsinfluencingtheaccuracyofnoninvasivebloodpressuremeasurementsinpatientsadmittedforcardiogenicshock
AT tumovapavlina factorsinfluencingtheaccuracyofnoninvasivebloodpressuremeasurementsinpatientsadmittedforcardiogenicshock
AT rokytarichard factorsinfluencingtheaccuracyofnoninvasivebloodpressuremeasurementsinpatientsadmittedforcardiogenicshock
AT hromadkamilan factorsinfluencingtheaccuracyofnoninvasivebloodpressuremeasurementsinpatientsadmittedforcardiogenicshock