Key result
Beat-to-beat continuous blood pressure measurement using a Finometer showed no significant difference in systolic blood pressure compared to auscultatory measurement (mean difference 0.23 mmHg).
Why the study?
To validate the accuracy of beat-to-beat blood pressure measurements against auscultatory aneroid sphygmomanometer readings, and to explore differences with daytime ambulatory blood pressure measurements.
Does beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement accurately reflect auscultatory and ambulatory blood pressure in adult participants?
Cross-Sectional (n=46)
No
Does beat-to-beat blood pressure measurement accurately reflect auscultatory and ambulatory blood pressure in adult participants?
Beat-to-beat systolic blood pressure measurements are reliable compared to auscultatory methods, but diastolic measurements show significant disparities, and ambulatory monitoring yields higher readings than both.
Supports Finometer SBP reliability versus auscultation in research; leaves open validation for diastolic values and ambulatory use.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to validate the accuracy of beat-to-beat measurements with those taken with an aneroid sphygmomanometer by auscultatory method. A secondary aim was to explore differences between auscultatory and beat-to-beat blood pressure (BP) with daytime ambulatory BP measurements. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: A total of 46 participants, comprising 21 males, aged 47±13 years, height 171±8.5 cm and weight 82±16.8 kg attended the Exercise Physiology Laboratory at the University of New England (Armidale, New South Wales, Australia). During the visit, participants had their BP - systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) - measured using auscultatory methods and a Finometer. An ambulatory BP monitor was fitted during the same visit and worn for a minimum of 12 h. RESULTS: Auscultatory measurements were slightly higher than beat-to-beat for both SBP and DBP. There was no difference between auscultatory and beat-to-beat SBP with a mean difference of 0.23 mmHg (P=0.87). There were disparities between auscultatory and beat-to-beat DBP, with a mean difference of 4.82 mmHg (P<0.01). Daytime ambulatory BP was higher than both auscultatory and beat-to-beat measurements for both SBP and DBP, with P less than 0.001 for all measures. CONCLUSION: There was a high level of reliability in the beat-to-beat SBP with that seen by auscultatory; however, there were disparities in DBP measurements using the same devices, which raise concerns over the accuracy of beat-to-beat DBP. Ambulatory systolic and diastolic measures were higher than beat-to-beat and auscultatory; however, they may be more suitable for monitoring diurnal changes in BP, depending upon the research model.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Carlson et al. (2018) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=46). Beat-to-beat continuous BP measurement (Finometer) vs. Auscultatory BP measurement (aneroid sphygmomanometer) was evaluated on Difference in resting systolic blood pressure (SBP) (MD 0.23, 95% CI -2.68 to 3.15, p=0.87). Beat-to-beat continuous blood pressure measurement using a Finometer showed no significant difference in systolic blood pressure compared to auscultatory measurement (mean difference 0.23 mmHg).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: