Key result
The cuffless Checkme device yielded systolic blood pressure measurements comparable to a reference monitor in the supine position (mean difference -1.8 mmHg), though 46% of readings differed by >5 mmHg.
Why the study?
Does the Checkme Health Monitor accurately measure blood pressure compared to a validated oscillometric reference monitor in volunteers?
Population
52 volunteers across 3 BP ranges: high, normal, and low, mean age 54.1, 18 men and 19 women.
Comparison
Cuffless blood pressure measurement using the… vs Validated, oscillometric reference BP monitor.
Design
Cross-sectional, Measurements were performed in randomized order
Authors
Loading...
High discrepancy rate cautions against clinical reliance on cuffless BP readings; leaves open requirements for enhanced accuracy validation.
Cross-Sectional (n=37)
Randomized order of measurements
No
Does the Checkme Health Monitor accurately measure blood pressure compared to a validated oscillometric reference monitor in volunteers?
Mean Difference: -1.8
Absolute Event Rate: 138.4% vs 136.6%
The Checkme cuffless BP monitor correlated well with a reference monitor, particularly in the calibrated supine position, though 46% of measurements differed by >5 mmHg.
Schoot et al. (2016) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=37). Checkme Health Monitor vs. Vital Signs Monitor 300 series (reference monitor) was evaluated on Systolic blood pressure in the supine position at heart level (Mean difference -1.8 mmHg). The cuffless Checkme device yielded systolic blood pressure measurements comparable to a reference monitor in the supine position (mean difference -1.8 mmHg), though 46% of readings differed by >5 mmHg.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: