Key result
Noninvasive ankle BP shows unacceptable agreement with invasive intra-arterial measurements compared to arm and thigh.
Why the study?
When blood pressure cannot be measured in the upper arm, the lower leg site is typically used, but the agreement between noninvasive and invasive blood pressure across different sites in intensive care patients needed comparison.
Does noninvasive blood pressure measurement at the ankle agree with invasive intra-arterial measurement as well as arm and thigh measurements in intensive care patients?
Observational (n=58)
No
Does noninvasive blood pressure measurement at the ankle agree with invasive intra-arterial measurement as well as arm and thigh measurements in intensive care patients?
p-value: p=<0.05
Noninvasive blood pressure measurements at the ankle show poor agreement with invasive intra-arterial measurements compared to arm and thigh sites in intensive care patients.
Ankle NIBP should not yet supplant arm/thigh or invasive monitoring in ICU; leaves open validation in larger critical care cohorts.
BACKGROUND: When blood pressure cannot be measured in the upper arm, the lower leg site is usually used. AIM: To compare the agreement between noninvasive and invasive blood pressure values for each site (arm, thigh, and ankle) in intensive care patients. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted in a tertiary intensive care unit. The arm, thigh, and ankle were used for a noninvasive blood pressure measurement. All noninvasive measurements were performed in both sitting and semi-sitting positions. Blood pressure values at each site were compared with intra-arterial measurements. The agreement between the invasive and noninvasive measurements was evaluated by a Bland-Altman analysis. RESULTS: A total of 348 paired blood pressure values were collected from 58 patients (mean age 42.29 ± 13.90, 44.8% female). The agreement between invasive and noninvasive blood pressure measurements in the arm and thigh site was acceptable. The agreement between invasive and noninvasive readings of diastolic and mean blood pressure in the supine position (bias ± SD of 3.21 ± 8.48, and 2.34 ± 7.08 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.05) and systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure in the semi-sitting position (bias ± sd of 2.36 ± 8.74 vs 3.93 ± 8.57 and 3.41 ± 7.15 mmHg, respectively; P < 0.05) was not acceptable. CONCLUSION: The agreement between invasive and noninvasive readings of systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressure was worse at the ankle than that observed at the arm and the thigh.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gürsoy et al. (2025) conducted an observational in Intensive care patients (n=58). Noninvasive blood pressure measurement at the ankle vs. Intra-arterial (invasive) blood pressure measurement and noninvasive measurement at the arm and thigh was evaluated on Agreement between noninvasive and invasive blood pressure values (p=<0.05). Noninvasive blood pressure measurement at the ankle showed unacceptable agreement with invasive intra-arterial measurements compared to the arm and thigh (P<0.05).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: