Why the study?
Does indirect blood pressure measurement using modified human oscillometric devices correlate with direct arterial pressure in healthy anesthetized dogs?
Does indirect blood pressure measurement using modified human oscillometric devices correlate with direct arterial pressure in healthy anesthetized dogs?
A specific modified human digital oscillometric blood pressure device (Machine B) demonstrated sufficient correlation with direct arterial measurements to be considered an effective monitoring device in anesthetized dogs.
Should not yet change practice in dogs; leaves open prospective validation of Machine B.
Two digital oscillometric human blood pressure measuring devices were modified and evaluated as blood pressure monitors in 12 healthy anesthetized dogs. Direct arterial pressures were measured via cannulation of the dorsal pedal artery and were correlated with indirect measurements through an inflatable cuff placed over the dorsal pedal artery below the hock joint of the contralateral limb. Direct and indirect measurements were compared for systolic, diastolic, and calculated mean arterial pressures. Blood pressure ranges between 215/145 mm of Hg and 65/30 mm of Hg were obtained, using combinations of halothane, phenylephrine, calcium, and IV administered fluids. Machine A was found to be insufficient for clinical application, on the basis of correlation coefficients between direct and indirect pressures of 0.78, 0.65, and 0.74 for systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressures, respectively. Higher correlation coefficients between direct and indirect pressures (0.77, 0.87, and 0.87, respectively) were obtained with machine B. The results of the study reported here suggest machine B may be an effective blood pressure monitoring device in anesthetized dogs.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hunter et al. (1990) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: