Why the study?
Does non-invasive beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring accurately trace fast changes compared to invasive intra-arterial radial pressure in patients?
Does non-invasive beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring accurately trace fast changes compared to invasive intra-arterial radial pressure in patients?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Non-invasive beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring using the Finapres device is highly correlated with invasive intra-arterial measurements and is well-suited to track relative changes in blood pressure.
The present study focuses on the accuracy in tracing fast beat-to-beat changes in blood pressure using a non-invasive technique. The measurements using a commercially available apparatus (Finapres, Ohmeda, USA) were compared to ipsilateral intra-arterial radial pressure. Eight patients were studied at rest, during deep breathing with a fixed rate of 6 breaths min-1, and during an exercise test on an ergometer cycle. A total of 900 systolic pressure values were included for statistical evaluation, covering a pressure range of 86-266 mmHg. On average the systolic correlation coefficient for the whole material was 0.97, with a range of 0.94-0.996. For mean pressure the correlation coefficient was on average 0.97, and for diastolic pressure 0.93. No systematic difference between the non-invasive and the invasive method was found, although for each individual patient a difference between direct and indirect measured blood pressure existed that could be relatively large (systolic pressure: average difference = 0.8 mmHg, SD = 16 mmHg). We found the method easy to handle and consider it excellently suited to track relative changes in blood pressure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gabriel et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: