• Medicine · Dec 2022

    Direct comparison of an automated oscillometric device with an electronic auscultatory device for epidemiologic survey to evaluate the prevalence of hypertension.

    • Yu-Mi Kim, Dae Woong Ohn, Seong Heon Kim, Dae-Hee Kim, Sang Min Park, In Jeong Cho, Sang-Hyun Ihm, Ki-Chul Sung, Kyung Won Oh, Jinho Shin, and Eun Mi Lee.
    • Department of Preventive Medicine, Hanyang University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of Korea.
    • Medicine (Baltimore). 2022 Dec 16; 101 (50): e32299e32299.

    AbstractMercury-free sphygmomanometers are gradually replacing the traditional sphygmomanometers in clinical settings and epidemiological surveys for measuring blood pressure (BP) due to mercury toxicity. No direct comparative studies have evaluated BP differences and statistical errors of automated oscillometric devices (ODs) against electronic auscultatory devices (ADs) for epidemiologic surveys. Herein, we evaluated the validity of ODs for the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (KNHANES) using the Universal Standard for BP device validation through a direct comparison with ADs as the reference standard. Four trained observers performed validation on 278 volunteers aged ≥ 19 years with a standardized BP measurement protocol. Agreement between the BP measurements recorded with an OD against those recorded with an AD was assessed by Lin's concordance correlation coefficient (CCC) and Bland-Altman's limits of agreement. To evaluate the agreement for BP classification, weighted kappa values were estimated. To explore the factors associated with BP measurement differences between the 2 devices, multiple linear regression analysis was performed. The average BP differences (OD-AD) were 2.6 ± 6.2 mm Hg for systolic BP (SBP) and -5.1 ± 5.6 mm Hg for diastolic BP (DBP). Lin's CCCs were 0.927 and 0.768 for the overall SBP and DBP, respectively. The cumulative percentage of absolute errors ≤10 mm Hg was 88.1% for SBP and 81.3% for DBP. The weighted kappa value for the Joint National Committee 7 BP classification was 0.75 (95% confidence interval: 0.68-0.81). An OD overestimated the prevalence of SBP (0.3%, P = .0222) and underestimated the prevalence of DBP (1.8%, P < .0001). Multivariate analysis to identify the risk factors for BP difference revealed the arm circumference (AC) to be negatively associated with BP difference. Male sex was positively associated, while age was negatively associated with SBP difference. OD-DBP was positively associated with DBP difference and negatively associated for DBP absolute error. ODs met the accuracy requirements of the Universal Standard criteria against ADs for SBP but not for DBP. Thus, the DBP values may be underestimated by ODs in the KNHANES.Copyright © 2022 the Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…