Insufficient pre-measurement rest caused blood pressure enhancements that reduced by ~10 mmHg after 10-18 min rest, while the Boso Medicus device showed 13 mmHg higher values than Welch Allyn.
Cross-Sectional (n=65)
Does standardized resting time and device selection significantly impact the accuracy and reliability of oscillatory blood pressure measurements?
Insufficient pre-measurement rest and inter-device discrepancies introduce clinically relevant blood pressure measurement errors, underscoring the necessity of standardized, repeated assessments to avoid false-positive hypertension diagnoses.
Abstract The implementation of different hypertension thresholds (e.g. ESC/ESH: 140:90 or ACC/AHH: 130:80) substantially increased hypertension prevalence donation of pharmacological treatment across various populations. Under narrow margins of only 10mmHg, measurement accuracy and reliability become decisive for clinical decision-making. However, detailed information on systematic and random errors naturally occurring in clinical practice under repeated testing conditions remain widely limited. To provide practically relevant insights, 65 participants were recruited for visited the lab four times with one un-standardized arrival measurement to mimic oftentimes observed clinical real-world scenarios followed by four standardized measurements performed in adherence with current guidelines. Tests were performed with two certified blood pressure devices, each on two testing days to quantify intra- and interday, as well as interdevice measurement errors via relative reliability and systematic and random measurement errors. Insufficient pre-measurement rest periods caused clinically relevant systematic blood pressure enhancements. Within a subsequent 10–18 min rest, the blood pressure was reliably reduced with about 10 mmHg on both days and both devices. However, the Boso Medicus testing device showed consistently higher blood pressure values with 13mmHg compared to the Welch Allyn monitor. Although measurements could be replicated inter-day in both devices, substantial interdevice discrepancies and clinically relevant random errors were observed, that can cause false-positive hypertension diagnoses, especially when pre-measurement rest was insufficient. Results underscore the relevance of performing several blood pressure assessments (per day and on different days) to account for random measurement errors and reduce the risk of inappropriate clinical decision-making and unnecessary treatment escalation.
Warneke et al. (Tue,) conducted a cross-sectional in Blood pressure measurement (n=65). Different blood pressure measurement devices (Boso Medicus vs Welch Allyn) and rest periods was evaluated on Intra- and interday, and interdevice measurement errors. Insufficient pre-measurement rest caused blood pressure enhancements that reduced by ~10 mmHg after 10-18 min rest, while the Boso Medicus device showed 13 mmHg higher values than Welch Allyn.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: