Comparative Study of Blood Pressure Measurement by Aneroid and Digital Manual Sphygmomanometer (original) (raw)
Related papers
Asian Journal of Medical Sciences, 2018
Background: Blood pressure (BP) measurement is the most common investigation performed nearly on all patients’ for diagnosis and treatment of hypertension. Accuracy of the measurement device is crucial for timely diagnosis.However, sphygmomanometer requires medical expertise whereas automated oscillometric device needs only careful observations in measuring BP.Aims and Objectives: The objective of the present study is to determinethe comparative accuracy of mercury sphygmomanometer and automated oscillometric device of measuring BP and the limit of agreement between the two devices.Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study designed and carried out at MGM Medical College, Indore among 438 normal individuals. Age, weight, height, body mass index, history and BP were recorded. An average of three recording of BP measurement by both the devices was used.Results: Out of a total, 52.3% were male and 47.7% were female. Average SBP (130.78±17.31 mmHg) and DBP (86.96±10.26 mmHg) measure...
Which is More Accurate in Measuring the Blood Pressure? A Digital or an Aneroid Sphygmomanometer
Journal of clinical and diagnostic research : JCDR, 2016
Hypertension is one of the major public health problem affecting the whole world so its accurate measurement is of utmost importance for its early diagnosis and management. Concerns related to the potential ill effects of mercury on health and environment, has led to the widespread use of non-mercury sphygmomanometers. A study was conducted to compare the accuracy of readings of aneroid and digital sphygmomanometers in reference to mercury sphygmomanometers and determine the hypertensive classification agreement between the mercury and non-mercury devices. The study was conducted in an OPD of a health centre in a rural community of West Bengal which is the rural field practice area of our institute. An aneroid and a digital sphygmomanometer were compared to a properly calibrated mercury sphygmomanometer. All the subjects above the age of 25 years, in two days per week, selected randomly from five working days per week in a period of one month were selected. Two blood pressure readin...
Clinical validation of aneroid sphygmomanometer
Indian journal of physiology and pharmacology, 2012
Recent concerns about the mercury toxicity and its ill effects on the environment and health has led to widespread use of aneroid manometers. Present study was conducted to analyse whether this change would lead to any systematic shift in measured blood pressure or consistency of blood pressure measurement in clinical setting. The clinical accuracy of the Welch Allyn aneroid sphygmomanometer model 7670-04 was studied against the mercury sphygmomanometer on 83 volunteers from Dehradun. Two blood pressure reading of each study subject was recorded with pretested instruments (aneroid and mercury sphygmomanometer). Data analysis showed the difference of means between the reading of two devices against mean of the observer reading for both systolic (-3.62 +/- 4.88) and diastolic (-2.36 +/- 3.77) blood pressure were not statistically different. The corresponding values of the SBP and DBP from both the instruments showed significant correlation. Regression analysis of mercury versus aneroi...
National Journal of Community Medicine, 2024
"Background: Hypertension is a significant global health issue, responsible for approximately 7.5 million deaths annually. Even a modest increase of 5 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure (BP) can elevate the risk of fatal stroke and infarction by about 25%. Hence this study aimed to assess the accuracy of aneroid and digital sphygmomanometers relative to the mercury sphygmomanometer. Methodology: This community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the urban slums of old Hubballi among 270 participants aged 30 years and above. Participants were selected using Probability Proportion to Size from 3 wards. Blood pressures were measured with all three sphygmomanometers and Bland Altman plot analy-sis was done. Results: The results revealed that the mean difference in systolic blood pressure compared to mercury was -0.57 mmHg for the aneroid and -4.63 mmHg for the digital (p <0.05). For diastolic blood pressure, the mean difference was -0.39 mmHg for the aneroid and -3.43 mmHg for the digital (p <0.05). Bland-Altman analysis showed agree-ment limits of 66.3% for systolic and 75.2% for diastolic blood pressure with the aneroid sphygmomanometer. Conclusion: The aneroid sphygmomanometer provides more reliable BP readings compared to the digital sphygmomanometer for both systolic and diastolic measurements."
Journal of Medical Statistics and Informatics, 2021
Aim: The aim of this study was to compare the accuracy of blood pressure (BP) readings with manual aneroid sphygmomanometer (MAS), manual mercury (MM) and an automated office digital blood pressure (AODBP) device. Subjects and methods: A cross-sectional study based on 1154 patients included sociodemographics, lifestyle habits, anthropometric measurements, and clinical biochemistry parameters. The sleep quality of participants was measured using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) test. The Bland-Altman plot analysis is used to compare two measurements' agreement against a mercury sphygmomanometer (MS). Results: Out of 1154 subjects, 528 (47.6%) were men and 626 (52.4%) were women. The study revealed significant differences between gender for age, educational, occupational, income, smoking, exercise, sport activities and fatigue, respectively. The present study showed that accurate measurement of BP is MAS readings which were slightly higher than AODBP estimates. Compared to the gold standard MM, the MAS provides better accuracy, valid and reliable readings than the AODBP device. Similarly, the biochemistry parameters regarding vitamin D, blood glucose, HbA1c, creatinine, bilirubin, albumin, total cholesterol, LDL-C, uric acid, and blood pressures revealed significantly gender differences. Multivariate stepwise logistic regression analysis revealed that the vitamin D deficiency (p<0.001), lack of sleep (p<0.001), lack of physical activity, (p<0.001), systolic blood pressure, mmHg (p=0.002), diastolic blood pressure, (p=0.005), obesity (p=0.006), smoking (p=0.015), and fatigue (p=0.032) were considered at higher risk as a predictors for hypertension patients. Conclusion: The present study showed that accurate measurement of BP is MAS readings, which were slightly higher than AODBP estimates. Compared to the gold standard MM, the MAS provides better accuracy, valid and reliable readings than the AODBP device.
Research on Biomedical Engineering, 2017
Introduction: Arterial Blood Pressure is a significant indicator of the current health condition of an individual. The correct detection of hypertension is essential, where this health problem is considered as one of the greatest health risks factors that affect the heart and circulatory system. This paper presents the importance of the application of metrological criteria for the diagnosis of hypertension using a sphygmomanometer aneroid. Methods: 72 mechanical aneroid sphygmomanometers were calibrated using a standard manometer and the indication error, hysteresis, air leakage and rapid exhaust were determined; readings of these sphygmomanometers were compared to a properly calibrated and adjusted aneroid sphygmomanometer to carry out pressure measurements as those made during the hypertension diagnosis; the uncertainty of measurement associated with the sphygmomanometers calibration, and pressure values was assessed according to the recommendations of the Guide to the Expression of Uncertainty in Measurement, defined by the Joint Committee for Guides in Metrology. Results: The results obtained have shown that about 61% of the evaluated aneroid sphygmomanometers did not meet the specifications. The variable that most contributed to the final calibration uncertainty was the hysteresis of the standard manometer, with 53% of contribution, followed by the sphygmomanometer resolution with 27%. Conclusion: The periodic verifications are essential to evaluate the performance of these devices. It was shown that uncertainty of measurement influences the final diagnosis of hypertension and the application of metrological criteria can increase the reliability of the final diagnosis.
Journal of Biology and Medicine, 2019
Mercury sphygmomanometers was developed over 100 years ago and largely unchanged since used in both hospital and ambulatory settings and considered as gold standard device for accurate blood pressure measurements. Blood pressure is important diagnostic index for circulatory function. If Blood pressure is abnormally low or high, it usually indicates greater health problem exist i.e. heart disease or stroke. So the aim of study was to compare blood pressure recordings taken with one stage approach, two stage approach and digital BP measurements among Healthy people. It was a survey approach and comparison design study were conducted and study protocol was approved by Institutional Ethics Committee. Healthy people were enrolled with total enumeration technique. Total 131 healthy people BP measurements taken with one stage, two stage approach and digital BP apparatus. Mean and SD of systolic (66.27±6.9) and diastolic (107.92±9.4) BP measurement obtained by one stage approach was similar to measurement obtained by digital BP apparatus whereas Mean & SD of systolic (55.15±6.71) and diastolic (103.52±9.23) BP measurement obtained by two stage approach are different. Systolic & Diastolic BP measurement taken by one stage approach and digital BP apparatus were similar and interchangeable and with two stage approach measured signifi cant difference indicate measurement may not be accurate.
Inaccuracy of seven popular sphygmomanometers for home measurement of blood pressure
Journal of Hypertension, 1990
Seven models, available commercially for the self-measurement of blood pressure, were subjected to a validation procedure in which three devices of each model were tested by observers who were trained to a high standard of accuracy. The models were the Omron HEM-400C, the Philips HP5308, the Healthcheck 'Cuffless' CX-5 060020, the Nissei Analogue Monitor, the Philips HP5306/B, the Systema Dr MI-150 and the Fortec Dr MI-100. The validation programme had a number of unique features which included assessment of interdevice variability before and after 1 month of home use, and a new form of analysis, which we term 'clinical', based on the likely influence of three grades of device inaccuracy on patient management. In the main validation phase, one device of each model was compared with simultaneous measurements made by two 'blinded' observers using a standard mercury sphygmomanometer (PyMaH Corporation, New Jersey, USA) in the same arm in 85 subjects with a wide range of blood pressures. Three models (the Healthcheck 'Cuffless' CX-5 060020, the Systema Dr MI-150 and the Fortec Dr MI-100) failed the interdevice variability tests and did not reach the main validation test. Two models (the Omron HEM-400C and the Philips HP5306JB) failed on the criteria set down by the American National Standard for Electronic or Automated Sphygmomanometers, as well as the 'clinical' criteria. The remaining two models (the Nissei Analogue Monitor and the Philips HP5308) were acceptable for the measurement of systolic blood pressure by both methods of analysis but failed in the 'clinical' analysis for diastolic blood pressure. The mercury sphygmomanometer was comfortably within the criteria for both methods of analysis.