scholarly journals STRIDE BP international initiative for accurate blood pressure measurement: Systematic review of published validation studies of blood pressure measuring devices

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (11) ◽  
pp. 1616-1622 ◽  
Author(s):  
George S. Stergiou ◽  
Eoin O'Brien ◽  
Martin Myers ◽  
Paolo Palatini ◽  
Gianfranco Parati ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurement ◽  
Validation Studies ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Measuring Devices ◽  
International Initiative

Blood pressure measurement prior to initiating hormonal contraception: a systematic review

Contraception ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 631-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Naomi K. Tepper ◽  
Kathryn M. Curtis ◽  
Maria W. Steenland ◽  
Polly A. Marchbanks
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurement ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Hormonal Contraception

PP309 Accuracy Of Automated Wrist Blood Pressure Monitors: Systematic Review

2020 ◽  
Vol 36 (S1) ◽  
pp. 27-27
Author(s):  
Nila Albuquerque ◽  
Thelma Araujo ◽  
Samantha Borges ◽  
Liana Queren Silva ◽  
Lais Vitoria da Silva ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Validation Studies ◽  
Measurement Errors ◽  
Research Question ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Patient Positioning ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
British Society ◽  
Blood Pressure Monitors

IntroductionThe use of automated blood pressure monitors is recommended by current guidelines; however, the accuracy of the device must be validated according to standardized protocols. Wrist blood pressure monitors have been undergoing technical improvements; nonetheless, their reliability is not unanimously recognized. No systematic review to date has analyzed the accuracy of wrist blood pressure monitors according to standardized protocols. This study aims to summarize the evidence on the accuracy of wrist blood pressure monitors in adults.MethodsThree databases (PubMed, Scopus and SciELO) were searched on 9 September 2019. The PICO (Patient, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome) strategy was used to outline the research question: Do automated wrist blood pressure monitors have accuracy equivalent to mercury sphygmomanometers in adults? Validation studies of wrist blood pressure monitors were included. Two reviewers independently screened abstracts and full texts. Summary data was extracted for each device, including mean difference of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) between the monitor and the mercury sphygmomanometer.ResultsThe review identified twenty-nine validation studies. Most of them were developed in China (44.82%), followed by Italy (20.68%). The most commonly used validation protocol was from the British Society of Hypertension. The mean difference between the devices and the mercury sphygmomanometers was 0.47 (±5.75) mmHg for SBP and 0.17 (±4.75) mmHg for DBP. The percentage of wrist blood pressure monitors that passed validation protocols was 93.1.ConclusionsMost automated wrist blood pressure monitors showed accuracy equivalent to the reference standard for blood pressure measurement, with mean differences less than 0.5 mmHg for SBP and 0.2 for DBP. This evidence supports the recommendation to adopt this technology for the measurement of blood pressure in adults. However, wrist blood pressure monitors have patient positioning specificities, which, if not followed, may lead to measurement errors. Therefore, the adoption of these monitors should consider not only their accuracy, but also aspects of patient use and preferences.

scholarly journals Diagnostic performance of clinic and home blood pressure measurements compared with ambulatory blood pressure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Auttakiat Karnjanapiboonwong ◽  
Thunyarat Anothaisintawee ◽  
Usa Chaikledkaew ◽  
Charungthai Dejthevaporn ◽  
John Attia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Ambulatory Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurement ◽  
Diagnostic Performance ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Home Blood Pressure ◽  
Reference Standard ◽  
Sensitivity Specificity ◽  
Pool Prevalence

Abstract Background: Clinic blood pressure measurement (CBPM) is currently the most commonly used form of screening for hypertension, however it might have a problem of white coat hypertension (WCHT) and masked hypertension (MHT). Home blood pressure measurement (HBPM) may be an alternative, but its diagnostic performance is inconclusive relative to CBPM. Therefore, this systematic review aimed to estimate the performance of CBPM and HBPM compared with ambulatory blood pressure measurement(ABPM) and to pool prevalence of WCHT and MHT. Methods: Medline, Scopus, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and WHO's International Clinical Trials Registry Platform databases were searched up to 23rd January 2020. Studies having diagnostic tests as CBPM or HBPM with reference standard as ABPM which reported sensitivity and specificity of both tests and/or proportion of WCHT or MHT were eligible. Diagnostic performance of CBPM and HBPM were pooled using bivariate mixed-effect regression model. Random effect model was applied to pool prevalence of WCHT and MHT. Results: Fifty-eight studies were eligible. Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and diagnostic odds ratio (DOR) of CBPM, when using 24-hour ABPM as the reference standard, were 74%(95%CI:65%-82%), 79%(95%CI:61%-87%), and 11.11(95%CI:6.82-14.20), respectively. Pooled prevalence of WCHT and MHT were 0.24 (95% CI: 0.19, 0.29) and 0.29 (95% CI: 0.20, 0.38). Pooled sensitivity, specificity, and DOR of HBPM were 71%(95%CI:61%-80%), 82%(95%CI:77%-87%), and 11.60(95%CI:8.55.0-22.03), respectively. Conclusions: Diagnostic performances of HBPM were slightly higher than CBPM. However, the prevalence of MHT was high in negative CBPM and some persons with normal HBPM had elevated BP from 24-hour ABPM. Therefore, ABPM is still necessary for confirming the diagnosis of HT.

scholarly journals Method of Blood Pressure Measurement in Neonates and Infants: A Systematic Review and Analysis

2020 ◽  
Vol 221 ◽  
pp. 23-31.e5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Janis M. Dionne ◽  
Stephen A. Bremner ◽  
Simin K. Baygani ◽  
Beau Batton ◽  
Ebru Ergenekon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Blood Pressure ◽  
Pressure Measurement ◽  
Blood Pressure Measurement ◽  
Neonates And Infants
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document