Key result
Cuffless BP monitoring tracks systolic BP changes significantly worse than standard cuff-based monitoring.
Why the study?
The ability of cuffless blood pressure monitoring devices to track changes in blood pressure levels over 24 h related to an initial calibration blood pressure was unknown.
Does a cuffless pulse transit time 24-h blood pressure monitoring device accurately track blood pressure changes over 24 hours compared to standard cuff-based monitoring in adults?
Cross-Sectional (n=166)
No
Does a cuffless pulse transit time 24-h blood pressure monitoring device accurately track blood pressure changes over 24 hours compared to standard cuff-based monitoring in adults?
Absolute Event Rate: 1.8% vs 7.4%
p-value: p=<0.0001
A 24-h cuffless pulse transit time blood pressure monitoring device showed a significantly lower ability to track true blood pressure fluctuations away from the calibration baseline, failing to accurately detect white-coat or masked hypertension effects compared to standard cuff-based monitors.
Cuffless devices may underestimate true BP changes post-calibration; leaves open their reliability for 24-h monitoring pending validation studies.
OBJECTIVE: There is an increasing number of cuffless blood pressure (BP) measurement (BPM) devices. Despite promising results when comparing single measurements, the ability of these devices to track changes in BP levels over 24 h related to an initial calibration BP (CalibBP) is unknown. Our aim was to analyse this ability in a cuffless device using pulse transit time. METHODS: We prospectively enrolled 166 participants for simultaneously performed cuffless (Somnotouch-NIBP) and cuff-based (Spacelabs 90217A/IEM Mobil-O-graph) 24 h BPM. As CalibBP for the cuffless device, first cuff-based BP was used. As surrogate for changes in BP levels after the CalibBP, we used the difference between the CalibBP and mean 24 h, awake and asleep BP measured by the two devices. In addition, we analysed the relationship between the difference of the CalibBP and the cuff-based BPM versus the difference between the cuff-based and the cuffless BPM devices. RESULTS: Mean(SD) difference between the CalibBP and mean 24hBP by the cuff-based or cuffless BP device were 7.4 (13.2) versus 1.8 (8.3) mmHg for systolic ( P < 0.0001) and 6.6 (6.8) versus 1.6 (5.8) mmHg for diastolic ( P < 0.0001). A near linear relationship was seen among the difference between the CalibBP and the cuff-based BPM values and the difference between the cuff-based and cuffless BPM device. CONCLUSION: Our data indicate a lower ability of the cuffless BPM device to track changes of BP levels after CalibBP. In addition, cuffless device accuracy was associated with the changes in BP levels after the initial CalibBP - the larger the BP level change, the larger the difference between the devices. REGISTRATION: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03054688; NCT03975582.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Derendinger et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Individuals requiring 24-hour blood pressure measurement (n=166). Cuffless blood pressure measurement (Somnotouch-NIBP) vs. Standard upper-arm cuff-based 24h blood pressure measurement was evaluated on Difference between initial calibration BP and mean 24-hour systolic BP (p=<0.0001). The cuffless blood pressure monitoring device showed a significantly lower ability to track systolic BP level changes after calibration compared to standard cuff-based monitoring (mean difference 1.8 vs 7.4 mmHg, p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: