Key result
Computer-simulated uncertainty for two consecutive auscultatory blood pressure measurements ranged from -8.4 to 8.4 mmHg in systolic BP, compared to -8.3 to 8.3 mmHg in a human-subject experiment.
Why the study?
The auscultatory method has an intrinsic uncertainty in blood pressure predictions, prompting this analysis to characterize the origins of uncertainty for two consecutive measurements.
What is the uncertainty associated with two consecutive blood pressure measurements using the auscultatory method?
Observational (n=20)
What is the uncertainty associated with two consecutive blood pressure measurements using the auscultatory method?
There is significant intrinsic uncertainty in consecutive auscultatory blood pressure measurements, which should be accounted for in clinical practice.
Notable uncertainty in consecutive auscultatory BP measurements warrants clinical caution; simulation extends human data but leaves validation open.
Accurate non-invasive blood pressure measurements are vital in preventing and treating many cardiovascular diseases. The “gold standard” for non-invasive procedures is the auscultatory method, which is based on detecting Korotkoff sounds while deflating an arm cuff. Using this method as a “gold standard” requires highly-trained technicians and has an intrinsic uncertainty in its blood pressure predictions. In this paper, we analyze and characterize the origins of this uncertainty. This paper defines an uncertainty model for two consecutive blood pressure measurements. Our research group developed a computer-based simulation of auscultatory blood pressure measurement uncertainty, and these results were compared to a human-subject experiment with a group of 20 diverse-conditioned individuals. Uncertainties were categorized and quantified. The total computer-simulated uncertainty ranged between -8.4 mmHg to 8.4 mmHg in systolic blood pressure and -8.4 mmHg to 8.3 mmHg in diastolic blood pressure at a 95% confidence interval, while the limits in the human-based study ranged from -8.3 mmHg to 8.3 mmHg in systolic blood pressure and -16.7 mmHg to 4.2 mmHg in diastolic blood pressure.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vazquez et al. (2022) conducted an observational in Blood pressure measurement (n=20). Computer-based simulation of auscultatory blood pressure measurement vs. Human-subject experiment was evaluated on Uncertainty in systolic and diastolic blood pressure. Computer-simulated uncertainty for two consecutive auscultatory blood pressure measurements ranged from -8.4 to 8.4 mmHg in systolic BP, compared to -8.3 to 8.3 mmHg in a human-subject experiment.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: