Why the study?
A clinically used cuffless blood pressure device using pulse transit time yields higher readings than cuff-based 24-hour monitoring, prompting evaluation of a recent software update.
Does a cuffless blood pressure device with updated software improve agreement and diagnostic accuracy compared to a standard cuff-based 24-hour blood pressure monitor in individuals requiring BP monitoring?
Does a cuffless blood pressure device with updated software improve agreement and diagnostic accuracy compared to a standard cuff-based 24-hour blood pressure monitor in individuals requiring BP monitoring?
The updated software for the cuffless blood pressure device improved agreement with the reference standard and showed excellent diagnostic accuracy for 24-hour and awake hypertension, though absolute values remain systematically higher and are not directly interchangeable.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support cuffless device validation studies; leaves open interchangeability with cuff-based monitors due to systematic differences.
A cuffless blood pressure (BP) device (TestBP) using pulse transit time is in clinical use, but leads to higher BP values compared to a cuff-based 24 h-BP reference device (RefBP). We evaluated the impact of a recent software update on BP results and TestBP's ability to differentiate between normo- and hypertension. 71 individuals had TestBP (Somnotouch-NIBP) and RefBP measurements simultaneously performed on either arm. TestBP results with software version V1.5 were compared to V1.4 and RefBP. Mean 24 h (± SD) BP for the RefBP, TestBP-V1.4 and TestBP-V1.5 were systolic 134.0 (± 17.3), 140.8 (± 20) and 139.1 (± 20) mmHg, and diastolic 79.3 (± 11.7), 85.8 (± 14.1) and 83.5 (± 13.0) mmHg, respectively (p-values < 0.001). TestBP-V1.5 area under the curve (95% confidence interval) versus RefBP for hypertension detection was 0.92 (0.86; 0.99), 0.94 (0.88; 0.99) and 0.77 (0.66; 0.88) for systolic and 0.92 (0.86; 0.99), 0.92 (0.85; 0.99) and 0.84 (0.74; 0.94) for diastolic 24 h, awake and asleep BP respectively. TestBP-V1.5 detected elevated systolic/diastolic mean 24 h-BP with a 95%/90% sensitivity and 65%/70% specificity. Highest Youden's Index was systolic 133 (sensitivity 95%/specificity 80%) and diastolic 87 mmHg (sensitivity 81%/specificity 98%). The update improved the agreement to RefBP. TestBP was excellent for detecting 24 h and awake hypertensive BP values but not for asleep BP values.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Socrates et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: