Why the study?
To evaluate the accuracy of the DBP-6279B arm-type fully automatic digital blood pressure monitor in pregnant populations according to standard validation protocols.
Does the DBP-6279B arm-type fully automatic digital blood pressure monitor provide accurate blood pressure measurements in pregnant women compared to a standard mercury sphygmomanometer?
Does the DBP-6279B arm-type fully automatic digital blood pressure monitor provide accurate blood pressure measurements in pregnant women compared to a standard mercury sphygmomanometer?
The DBP-6279B digital blood pressure monitor meets standard validation criteria for accuracy in pregnant women, including those with pre-eclampsia, supporting its clinical and home use.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
DBP-6279B meets accuracy standards in pregnancy; extends validation data to this population but leaves broader outcome impact open.
To evaluate the accuracy of the DBP-6279B arm-type fully automatic digital blood pressure monitor in pregnant populations according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020) and the Recognized Consensus Standards published by the Food and Drug Administration (FR Recognized List No.056, FR Recognized No. 3-166), a total of 115 pregnant women were enrolled in this clinical trial. One participant was excluded because it met the data exclusion criteria. The arm circumference and subgroup distributions of the subjects met the requirements of the protocol. According to criterion 1, the mean difference of systolic blood pressure between the test device and the reference device was ‑0.89 mmHg, with a SD of 5.60 mmHg. The mean difference of diastolic blood pressure was ‑0.17 mmHg, with a SD of 4.65 mmHg. The mean difference in both systolic and diastolic blood pressure was less than 5.0 mmHg, and the SD was less than 8.0 mmHg. Additional analyses were also conducted in accordance with criterion 2 and the results met the requirements, too. Therefore, it is recommended for pregnant populations in home and clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yang et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: