Key result
Intra-arterial blood pressure measurement yielded significantly higher systolic and diastolic readings compared to manual cuff auscultation at rest and during submaximal exercise (p<0.01).
Why the study?
Does intra-arterial blood pressure measurement differ from manual cuff auscultation at rest and during submaximal exercise in adults?
Observational (n=64)
Does intra-arterial blood pressure measurement differ from manual cuff auscultation at rest and during submaximal exercise in adults?
Effect estimate: bias for SBP: 22, 31, and 27 mm Hg; DBP: 5, 7, and 17 mm Hg
p-value: p=<0.01
Intra-arterial blood pressure measurement yields significantly higher systolic and diastolic readings compared to manual cuff auscultation during rest and submaximal exercise, which may impact the calculation of derived cardiovascular parameters.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuff auscultation may underestimate BP at rest and exercise; leaves open accuracy for derived parameters in research.
Wheatley et al. (2012) reported an observational. Intra-arterial (direct) blood pressure measurement vs. Cuff auscultation (manual) blood pressure measurement was evaluated on Systolic and diastolic blood pressure at rest, low, and moderate intensity exercise (bias for SBP: 22, 31, and 27 mm Hg; DBP: 5, 7, and 17 mm Hg, p=<0.01). Intra-arterial blood pressure measurement yielded significantly higher systolic and diastolic readings compared to manual cuff auscultation at rest and during submaximal exercise (p<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: