Key result
Cuffless PPG device tracks nocturnal systolic BP changes within ~2 mmHg of cuff-based monitoring.
Why the study?
Cuffless BP devices have shown potential for daytime BP estimation but have not precisely predicted nocturnal BP, complicating their use for ambulatory BP monitoring.
Does a photoplethysmography-based cuffless blood pressure device accurately estimate nocturnal awake-asleep blood pressure changes compared to a cuff-based oscillometric device in adults?
Observational (n=50)
Does a photoplethysmography-based cuffless blood pressure device accurately estimate nocturnal awake-asleep blood pressure changes compared to a cuff-based oscillometric device in adults?
Mean Difference: 1.6
A photoplethysmography-based cuffless device showed promising correlation but wide limits of agreement in tracking nocturnal blood pressure dipping compared to standard cuff-based monitoring, highlighting the need for full clinical validation.
Cuffless monitors show wide limits of agreement for nocturnal dipping; leaves open clinical adoption pending larger validation studies.
BACKGROUND: Cuffless blood pressure (BP) devices have demonstrated potential in estimating daytime BP but have not been able to predict nocturnal BP precisely, creating difficulties when the intended use is ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). We evaluated the ability of a photoplethysmography-based cuffless BP device, with the intended use 24-hour ABPM, to estimate nocturnal BP compared to a cuff-based oscillometric device. METHODS: Participants underwent 24-hour ABPM with the cuffless device placed on the non-dominant upper arm and a validated cuff-based oscillometric device on the dominant arm. The difference between mean awake and asleep BP (awake-asleep BP change) was calculated for both devices and used in the analyses. The statistical analyses were guided by the Awake/Asleep test (European Society of Hypertension 2023 Recommendations), however, there were methodological deviances from these recommendations. Most importantly, we used only cuffless BP values that were obtained simultaneously with the reference device. RESULTS: Data from 50 participants, aged 18-80 years, with mean (standard deviation; SD) inclusion office systolic/diastolic BP (SBP/DBP) 120.1 (11.5)/75.3 (7.9), were analyzed. The cuffless device achieved a mean difference [95% limits of agreement] of 1.6 [-8.0, 11.2] mmHg for SBP and 1.2 [-6.7, 9.1] mmHg for DBP in awake-asleep BP changes compared to the reference. Pearson correlation coefficients (95% confidence interval) for SBP/DBP were 0.75 (0.59, 0.85)/0.74 (0.58, 0.84). Our population had an overrepresentation of normal and low BP. CONCLUSION: Although the cuffless device shows promise in successfully tracking nocturnal BP, full validation is required before clinical use.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hove et al. (2026) conducted an observational in Normal and low blood pressure (n=50). Photoplethysmography-based cuffless blood pressure device vs. Cuff-based oscillometric device was evaluated on Awake-asleep blood pressure change (mean difference) for systolic blood pressure (MD 1.6 mmHg, 95% CI -8.0 to 11.2 (Limits of Agreement)). A cuffless photoplethysmography-based blood pressure device tracked nocturnal systolic BP changes with a mean difference of 1.6 mmHg (95% LoA -8.0 to 11.2) compared to a standard cuff-based device.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: