Key Points
- To determine the accuracy and diagnostic reliability of publicly accessible, automated coin-operated blood pressure monitors relative to standard manual auscultation.
- Evaluated one automated monitor in a controlled laboratory setting (N=100) and eight monitors at randomly selected community sites (N=227).
- Compared automated readings directly against simultaneous or paired human observer measurements obtained using standard cuffs and auscultatory methods.
- Fifth phase diastolic blood pressure showed high concordance on average between automated machines and human observers.
- Systolic blood pressure measurements exhibited greater variance, with four machines differing from human averages by ≤1 mm Hg and two differing by ≥8 mm Hg.
- Machine-human reading agreement was slightly lower than human-human pairs, but classification discrepancies (normal, borderline, or high) were small, and linear regression showed consistent differences across the pressure range.
Structured PICO
Does an automated coin-operated blood pressure measuring device provide accurate measurements compared to human observers in the general public?
PPopulation327 persons (100 in laboratory and 227 in the field)
IInterventionAutomated coin-operated blood pressure measuring device
CComparatorHuman observers using standard cuff and auscultatory technique
OOutcomeAgreement in blood pressure measurements (systolic and diastolic) between machine and human observerssurrogate
Publicly available automated blood pressure machines provide measurements with acceptable agreement to human observers for practical purposes, supporting their utility for public screening.