Cargando…

Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure

BACKGROUND: The availability of an accurate continuous cuffless blood pressure (BP) monitor would provide an alternative to both invasive continuous BP and 24-h intermittent cuff-based BP monitors. We investigated the accuracy of a cuffless beat to beat (BtB) device compared to both invasive BP (iBP...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Moharram, Mohammed A, Wilson, Luke C, Williams, Michael JA, Coffey, Sean
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Elsevier 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7803068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33447759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchy.2020.100030
_version_ 1783635873571536896
author Moharram, Mohammed A
Wilson, Luke C
Williams, Michael JA
Coffey, Sean
author_facet Moharram, Mohammed A
Wilson, Luke C
Williams, Michael JA
Coffey, Sean
author_sort Moharram, Mohammed A
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: The availability of an accurate continuous cuffless blood pressure (BP) monitor would provide an alternative to both invasive continuous BP and 24-h intermittent cuff-based BP monitors. We investigated the accuracy of a cuffless beat to beat (BtB) device compared to both invasive BP (iBP) and brachial cuff BP (cBP) measurements. METHODS: Patients undergoing clinically indicated coronary angiography (CA) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were recruited. After calibration to an initial cBP reading, BP was measured simultaneously using a BtB device (SOMNOtouch NIBP), brachial artery iBP, and cBP at two time points. RESULTS: The study was terminated early due to a significant bias. Recordings from 14 participants (11 males, mean age 68.4 years) were analysed. Readings from BtB BP were higher than iBP. The bias between BtB BP and iBP was 34.3 mmHg (95%CI: 27.0, 41.5) and 23.6 mmHg (95%CI: 16.8, 30.4) for SBP and DBP respectively. A similar bias was seen between BtB BP and cBP, but cBP and iBP were largely in agreement. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CA/PCI, significant differences were detected between BtB BP and both invasively measured and cuff BP. The non-invasive BtB BP measurement device tested is not suitable for clinical or research use.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7803068
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Elsevier
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-78030682021-01-13 Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure Moharram, Mohammed A Wilson, Luke C Williams, Michael JA Coffey, Sean Int J Cardiol Hypertens Research Paper BACKGROUND: The availability of an accurate continuous cuffless blood pressure (BP) monitor would provide an alternative to both invasive continuous BP and 24-h intermittent cuff-based BP monitors. We investigated the accuracy of a cuffless beat to beat (BtB) device compared to both invasive BP (iBP) and brachial cuff BP (cBP) measurements. METHODS: Patients undergoing clinically indicated coronary angiography (CA) and/or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) were recruited. After calibration to an initial cBP reading, BP was measured simultaneously using a BtB device (SOMNOtouch NIBP), brachial artery iBP, and cBP at two time points. RESULTS: The study was terminated early due to a significant bias. Recordings from 14 participants (11 males, mean age 68.4 years) were analysed. Readings from BtB BP were higher than iBP. The bias between BtB BP and iBP was 34.3 mmHg (95%CI: 27.0, 41.5) and 23.6 mmHg (95%CI: 16.8, 30.4) for SBP and DBP respectively. A similar bias was seen between BtB BP and cBP, but cBP and iBP were largely in agreement. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing CA/PCI, significant differences were detected between BtB BP and both invasively measured and cuff BP. The non-invasive BtB BP measurement device tested is not suitable for clinical or research use. Elsevier 2020-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC7803068/ /pubmed/33447759 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchy.2020.100030 Text en © 2020 The Authors http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Research Paper
Moharram, Mohammed A
Wilson, Luke C
Williams, Michael JA
Coffey, Sean
Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title_full Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title_fullStr Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title_full_unstemmed Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title_short Beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
title_sort beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement using a cuffless device does not accurately reflect invasive blood pressure
topic Research Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7803068/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33447759
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijchy.2020.100030
work_keys_str_mv AT moharrammohammeda beattobeatbloodpressuremeasurementusingacufflessdevicedoesnotaccuratelyreflectinvasivebloodpressure
AT wilsonlukec beattobeatbloodpressuremeasurementusingacufflessdevicedoesnotaccuratelyreflectinvasivebloodpressure
AT williamsmichaelja beattobeatbloodpressuremeasurementusingacufflessdevicedoesnotaccuratelyreflectinvasivebloodpressure
AT coffeysean beattobeatbloodpressuremeasurementusingacufflessdevicedoesnotaccuratelyreflectinvasivebloodpressure