Key result
Hearing threshold-based automatic blood pressure assessment achieves ~0.99 SBP correlation with the auscultatory method.
Why the study?
The auscultatory method of blood pressure monitoring is sensitive to observer condition and environmental noise, necessitating an objective automatic assessment method.
Does an automatic blood pressure assessment method based on human hearing threshold accurately measure blood pressure compared to the auscultatory method?
Does an automatic blood pressure assessment method based on human hearing threshold accurately measure blood pressure compared to the auscultatory method?
Mean Difference: 0.31
p-value: p=<0.0001
An automated blood pressure measurement method based on the human hearing threshold shows high correlation and minimal mean difference compared to standard auscultation.
May enable automated SBP assessment via equal loudness contours; leaves open validation against reference methods before clinical use.
OBJECTIVE: In this study, to measure blood pressure (BP) on the basis of human hearing threshold, we proposed a method that detects the audible or inaudible Korotkoff sounds (K-sounds) using the equal loudness contour and automatically assesses the BP. METHODS: In this study, we detected the systolic period of K-sounds using cuff pressure oscillation and then converted the K-sounds corresponding to the systolic interval into sound pressure levels (SPLs). Next, the systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were assessed by mapping the K-sounds, which were converted into SPLs on an equal loudness contour. RESULTS: To validate the accuracy of our proposed method, we compared it with the auscultatory method. The mean differences (mean±SD) in the SBP and DBP were 0.31±1.95 and 1.20±2.17 mmHg, respectively. For the SBP, the linear regression equation was y=0.98x+1.56 mmHg (where x and y represent the auscultatory and the proposed method, respectively), with a SE of estimate of 1.93 mmHg and a correlation coefficient of 0.99. For the DBP, the linear regression equation was y=1.01x-1.94 mmHg, with an SE of estimate of 2.18 mmHg and a correlation coefficient of 0.98. All P values were less than 0.0001 for both regressions. CONCLUSION: The auscultatory method of BP monitoring is sensitive to the observer's condition or environmental noise. To overcome these disadvantages, we used the human hearing threshold for objective SBP and DBP automatic assessment, and this method can be applicable to an automatic auscultatory method.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hong et al. (2017) studied Blood pressure measurement. Automatic assessment of blood pressure based on human hearing threshold vs. Auscultatory method was evaluated on Mean difference in systolic and diastolic blood pressure (MD 0.31 mmHg for SBP and 1.20 mmHg for DBP, p=<0.0001). An automatic blood pressure assessment method based on the human hearing threshold showed high correlation with the auscultatory method (r=0.99 for SBP, r=0.98 for DBP; P<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: