Key result
A cuffless PTT device measured significantly higher mean 24-hour systolic (140.8 vs 134.0 mm Hg) and diastolic (85.8 vs 79.3 mm Hg) blood pressure compared to a standard cuff-based device (p<0.0001).
Why the study?
Does a cuffless pulse transit time device provide comparable 24-hour blood pressure measurements to a standard cuff-based device in clinical practice?
Observational (n=71)
Does a cuffless pulse transit time device provide comparable 24-hour blood pressure measurements to a standard cuff-based device in clinical practice?
Absolute Event Rate: 140.8% vs 134%
p-value: p=<0.0001
A novel cuffless pulse transit time device measured significantly higher 24-hour systolic and diastolic blood pressures compared to a standard cuff-based device, indicating a lack of comparability in clinical practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuffless PTT device yields significantly higher 24-h BP than cuff-based reference; leaves open clinical interchangeability pending outcome validation.
Krisai et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Blood pressure measurement (n=71). Cuffless PTT device (TestBP) vs. Standard upper arm cuff-based BP device (RefBP) was evaluated on Mean 24-hour systolic blood pressure (p=<0.0001). A cuffless PTT device measured significantly higher mean 24-hour systolic (140.8 vs 134.0 mm Hg) and diastolic (85.8 vs 79.3 mm Hg) blood pressure compared to a standard cuff-based device (p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: