Key result
Simultaneous automatic BP measurement yields a ~1.2 mmHg lower absolute interarm difference versus conventional methods.
Why the study?
Does simultaneous automatic measurement provide more reproducible interarm blood pressure differences compared to conventional sequential measurement in patients with cardiovascular risk factors?
Population
118 patients with two or more cardiovascular risk factors, mean age 59±17 years, referred to two internal…
Comparison
Simultaneous automatic measurement taken three… vs Conventional measurement taken with a validated…
Design
Cross-sectional
Authors
Loading...
Simultaneous automatic measurements may reduce IAD overestimation; hypothesis-generating for routine screening pending prospective outcome data.
Cross-Sectional (n=118)
Yes
Does simultaneous automatic measurement provide more reproducible interarm blood pressure differences compared to conventional sequential measurement in patients with cardiovascular risk factors?
Absolute Event Rate: 3.7% vs 4.9%
p-value: p=<0.03
Simultaneous automatic measurement of blood pressure in both arms provides smaller and more reproducible interarm differences than conventional sequential measurement.
Lohmann et al. (2010) conducted a cross-sectional in Cardiovascular risk factors (n=118). Simultaneous automatic measurement (SAM) vs. Conventional measurement (CM) was evaluated on Average absolute interarm difference (IAD) of systolic blood pressure (p=<0.03). Simultaneous automatic measurement yielded a significantly lower average absolute interarm difference in systolic blood pressure compared to conventional measurement (3.7 mmHg vs 4.9 mmHg; P<0.03).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: