Why the study?
Manual mercury sphygmomanometers require adequate training and practice despite being the gold standard, whereas automated devices are more convenient, prompting a comparison of readings and variations between them.
Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Comparison
Readings taken by manual mercury vs digital sphygmomanometer
Design
Comparative study
Measurement of blood pressure accurately is imperative in the diagnosis and monitoring of a wide range of clinical conditions. The mercury sphygmomanometer discovered more than 100 years ago, has since been used as the gold standard to record blood pressure. Using the mercury sphygmomanometer requires adequate training and practice, whereas the automated devices are convenient and easier to use. We wanted to compare the readings taken by the manual mercury and the digital sphygmomanometer and determine the variations in the readings if any.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Pandarbale et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: