Key result
Radial artery palpation underestimates SBP by ~5 mmHg compared to brachial auscultation.
Why the study?
Systolic blood pressure contributes more to cardiovascular disease than diastolic blood pressure, especially in elderly persons, and the reliability of radial artery palpation compared with brachial artery auscultation for measuring SBP was investigated.
Does palpation of the radial artery accurately measure systolic blood pressure compared to auscultation of the brachial artery in hypertension clinic patients?
Cross-Sectional (n=40)
No
Does palpation of the radial artery accurately measure systolic blood pressure compared to auscultation of the brachial artery in hypertension clinic patients?
Mean Difference: -5.2
p-value: p=< 0.01
Palpation of the radial artery underestimates auscultatory systolic blood pressure by an average of 6 mmHg, but offers an acceptable alternative in clinical practice when corrected.
Alerts clinicians to possible SBP underestimation by radial palpation; leaves open effects on hypertension classification or management.
BACKGROUND: Systolic blood pressure contributes more to cardiovascular disease than DBP, especially in elderly persons. Palpation of the radial artery to assess SBP - Riva-Rocci's technique - may be an attractive alternative for auscultatory SBP in these patients. Therefore, we investigated the difference between SBP determined by palpation of the radial artery (pSBP) and SBP assessed by auscultation of the brachial artery (aSBP). METHODS: Patients were included from the waiting room of a hypertension outpatient clinic. In each patient eight simultaneous pSBP and aSBP measurements were assessed by two observers in the same arm. After every two readings the observers switched between pSBP and aSBP. RESULTS: Forty patients were included, 25 men (62.5%), mean age 55.3 years (range 24-78). From a total of 320 measurements, mean difference between pSBP and aSBP was -5.2 mmHg (range -12-26 mmHg) (P < 0.01). This difference correlated significantly with BMI (r = 0.51, P < 0.01), but not with age (r = 0.15, P = 0.35), pulse rate (r = 0.29, P = 0.09) or mean SBP (r = 0.03, P = 0.85). After averaging the first three comparisons, reproducibility did not improve when increasing the number of comparisons. When correcting for the underestimation of 6 mmHg over the first three comparisons, Riva-Rocci's technique estimates SBP with an acceptable accuracy. CONCLUSION: In clinical practice, Riva-Rocci's palpatory technique offers an acceptable alternative for auscultatory SBP measurement. It is recommended to take three measurements and then correct for the average underestimation of 6 mmHg.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hoeven et al. (2010) conducted a cross-sectional in Hypertension (n=40). Palpation of the radial artery (pSBP) vs. Auscultation of the brachial artery (aSBP) was evaluated on Difference between pSBP and aSBP (MD -5.2 mmHg, p=< 0.01). Palpation of the radial artery underestimated systolic blood pressure by a mean of 5.2 mmHg compared with auscultation of the brachial artery (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: