Key result
An auscultatory technique for measuring digital blood pressure was as reliable an index of systolic pressure as plethysmographic and direct observation methods.
Why the study?
Is an auscultatory technique using a modified stethoscope as reliable as plethysmographic and direct observation methods for measuring digital systolic blood pressure in human subjects?
Population
Human subjects
Comparison
Auscultatory technique for measuring digital… vs Plethysmographic method of measuring digital…
Design
Other
Authors
Loading...
May offer a simple bedside alternative for digital systolic pressure; leaves open validation in larger, diverse cohorts before adoption.
Cross-Sectional
Is an auscultatory technique using a modified stethoscope as reliable as plethysmographic and direct observation methods for measuring digital systolic blood pressure in human subjects?
An auscultatory technique using a modified stethoscope provides a reliable method for measuring digital systolic blood pressure.
Gaskell et al. (1958) reported a cross-sectional. Auscultatory technique for measuring digital blood pressure vs. Plethysmographic method and direct observation of capillary blood flow was evaluated on Reliability as an index of systolic pressure. An auscultatory technique for measuring digital blood pressure was as reliable an index of systolic pressure as plethysmographic and direct observation methods.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: