Key result
An anaeroid manometer and an automated device both met AAMI criteria (<5 mmHg difference) compared to a mercury standard, though the automated device overestimated SBP by 2.12 mmHg (P=0.002).
Why the study?
Do an anaeroid manometer and an automated oscillometric device provide accurate blood pressure measurements compared to a traditional mercury sphygmomanometer in human participants?
Population
512 participants
Comparison
Anaeroid manometer and automated oscillometric… vs Traditional mercury sphygmomanometer
Design
Cross-sectional, Two independent observers
Authors
Loading...
May support anaeroid and automated devices as mercury alternatives; leaves open prospective validation in diverse populations.
Cross-Sectional (n=512)
Do an anaeroid manometer and an automated oscillometric device provide accurate blood pressure measurements compared to a traditional mercury sphygmomanometer in human participants?
Both an anaeroid manometer and an automated oscillometric device met AAMI criteria for accuracy and may serve as viable replacements for traditional mercury sphygmomanometers.
Elliott et al. (2007) conducted a cross-sectional in Blood pressure measurement (n=512). Anaeroid manometer and automated oscillometric device vs. Mercury sphygmomanometer was evaluated on Average difference and standard deviation of the difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure readings. An anaeroid manometer and an automated device both met AAMI criteria (<5 mmHg difference) compared to a mercury standard, though the automated device overestimated SBP by 2.12 mmHg (P=0.002).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: