Comparison between an automated device and a manual mercury sphygmomanometer in an epidemiological survey of hypertension prevalence

Comparisons of an automated oscillometric device with a hybrid manual auscultatory device for the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey

This study evaluated an oscillometric device (OD), Microlife WatchBP Office AFIB, and a hybrid manual auscultatory device (AD), Greenlight 300TM, to determine a suitable blood pressure (BP) measurement device for the Korea National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey in a mercury-free context. Adhering to the 2018 Universal Standard's suggested consensus, the study involved 800 subjects (mean age 51.2 ± 17.5 years; 44.3% male), who underwent triplicate BP measurements following 5 min of rest in a randomized order (OD-first: 398 participants; AD-first: 402 participants). BP difference was calculated as OD value minus AD value, with results stratified by measurement sequence. The overall BP difference and tolerable error probability were -1.1 ± 6.5/-2.6 ± 4.9 mmHg and 89.2%/92.5% for systolic/diastolic BP (SBP/DBP), respectively. Lin's concordance correlation coefficient was 0.907/0.844 for SBP/DBP (OD-first/AD-first: 0.925/0.892 for SBP, 0.842/0.845 for DBP). The overall agreement for hypertension (BP ≥ 140 and/or 90 mmHg) was 0.71 (p < 0.0001), and the OD underestimated the overall hypertension prevalence by 5.1%. Analysis of the AD-first data revealed a lower level of agreement compared to the OD-first data; however, the observed blood pressure difference adhered to Criterion 1 of the 2018 Universal Standard. Microlife met the Criterion 1 of 2018 Universal Standard but underestimated the prevalence of hypertension. The BP discrepancy increased with higher BP levels, male sex, and smaller AC. With increasing age, the discrepancy decreased for SBP and increased for DBP.

Can an automatic oscillometric device replace a mercury sphygmomanometer on blood pressure measurement? a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

A mercury sphygmomanometer has been considered a gold standard for measuring blood pressure. However, by the Minamata Convention on Mercury, the traditional mercury sphygmomanometer is being replaced by an automated oscillometric device. This study aimed to provide scientific evidence to determine whether an automated oscillometric device can replace a mercury sphygmomanometer and if it is applicable in routine practice.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and CINAHL were searched on 4 May 2018. Studies comparing blood pressure measurements between automated oscillometric devices and mercury sphygmomanometers were included. Study characteristics were abstracted using the evidence table, and random-effects meta-analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Data were compiled from 24 studies comprising 47 759 subjects. The results of meta-analysis showed that automated oscillometric devices measured lower than mercury sphygmomanometers for both systolic blood pressure (mean differences -1.75 mmHg, 95% confidence intervals: -3.05 to -0.45, I = 91.0%) and diastolic blood pressure (mean differences -1.20 mmHg, 95% confidence intervals: -2.16 to -0.24, I = 95.0%). In sub-group analyses by manufacturer, BpTRU measured lower than the mercury sphygmomanometer and OMRON showed no difference compared to the mercury sphygmomanometer for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure, but the results differed depending on the devices.

CONCLUSION

As a result of this review, the difference in blood pressure between the mercury sphygmomanometer and the automated oscillometric device was within 5 mmHg, but the heterogeneity between the studies was very high. The automated oscillometric devices showed differences in blood pressure results according to the manufacturer and product type.

Comparison of the accuracy and errors of blood pressure measured by 2 types of non-mercury sphygmomanometers in an epidemiological survey

A few studies have compared auscultation and oscillometric devices with the mercury sphygmomanometer (MS) reference values for blood pressure (BP) measurement in an epidemiologic survey.Four trained observers recorded BP measurements from 766 subjects from general Korean population in 2014 and 2015. Measurements were repeated 3 times for each device, alternately using an MS and 2 electronic devices (EDs; Greenlight 300 vs Omron HEM-907), together with a randomized device sequence. The BP measurement difference was defined as BP measured by MS minus BP obtained by ED, and the absolute error as the absolute value of the difference.Mean differences in systolic BP (SBP) were -0.52 and -0.62 mmHg and those of diastolic BP (DBP) were -0.78 and 6.23 mmHg (P < .01) in the Greenlight and Omron device group, respectively. The concordance correlation coefficients were 0.97 and 0.94 for SBP and 0.95 and 0.76 for DBP in the Greenlight and Omron group, respectively (P < .05). Kappa values for the Joint National Committee 7 BP classification were 0.84 and 0.74 for Greenlight and Omron group, respectively. The prevalence of normotension, prehypertension and hypertension were 53.5%, 33.9%, and 12.5% with the MS and 59.8%, 29.0%, and 11.2% with the ED in the Omron group (P = .03, McNemar test), whereas they were insignificant in the Greenlight group.The Greenlight 300 may be a good alternative to the MS, and the Omron HEM-907 has good accuracy in SBP measurement. Due to the measurement error in DBP, Omron HEM-907 was inferior to the Greenlight device.

An inaccurate automated device negatively impacts the diagnosis and treatment of gestational hypertension

OBJECTIVES

Automated blood pressure devices are frequently introduced in maternity care without prior validation for their accuracy in pregnancy. Our objectives were to, firstly, establish the accuracy in pregnancy of a locally used device (Welch Allyn 300) and, secondly, to audit its impact on the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension.

STUDY DESIGN

Validation study: The device was evaluated using the grading criteria of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol (ESH-IP) (2010). Two observers took nine same-arm measurements alternating between the Welch Allyn and the mercury sphygmomanometer. Thirty-three women of any gestation were included. Clinical audit: One observer took three same-arm measurements alternating between the Welch Allyn and the mercury sphygmomanometer. One hundred women of any gestation referred with suspected hypertension were included. The main outcome measures were the proportion diagnosed with hypertension or commenced on anti-hypertensive treatment on the presenting visit when using either the manual or the automated device.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Grading criteria of the ESH-IP (2010) and proportion of women diagnosed with hypertension or commenced on antihypertensive therapy at the presenting visit when using either manual sphygmomanometry or the Welch Allyn device.

RESULTS

The Welch Allyn 300 series failed to meet the criteria of the ESH-IP (2010) for pregnancy. Compared to the mercury device, it under diagnosed hypertension by 48% and need for treatment by 80%.

CONCLUSIONS

The Welch Allyn 300 cannot be recommended for the measurement of blood pressure in pregnancy. Its use leads to the under-diagnosis and under-treatment of gestational hypertension.

Sources of inaccuracy in the measurement of adult patients' resting blood pressure in clinical settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

To interpret blood pressure (BP) data appropriately, healthcare providers need to be knowledgeable of the factors that can potentially impact the accuracy of BP measurement and contribute to variability between measurements.

METHODS

A systematic review of studies quantifying BP measurement inaccuracy. Medline and CINAHL databases were searched for empirical articles and systematic reviews published up to June 2015. Empirical articles were included if they reported a study that was relevant to the measurement of adult patients' resting BP at the upper arm in a clinical setting (e.g. ward or office); identified a specific source of inaccuracy; and quantified its effect. Reference lists and reviews were searched for additional articles.

RESULTS

A total of 328 empirical studies were included. They investigated 29 potential sources of inaccuracy, categorized as relating to the patient, device, procedure or observer. Significant directional effects were found for 27; however, for some, the effects were inconsistent in direction. Compared with true resting BP, significant effects of individual sources ranged from -23.6 to +33 mmHg SBP and -14 to +23 mmHg DBP.

CONCLUSION

A single BP value outside the expected range should be interpreted with caution and not taken as a definitive indicator of clinical deterioration. Where a measurement is abnormally high or low, further measurements should be taken and averaged. Wherever possible, BP values should be recorded graphically within ranges. This may reduce the impact of sources of inaccuracy and reduce the scope for misinterpretations based on small, likely erroneous or misleading, changes.

Prevalence of Masked Hypertension: a Population-Based Survey in a Large City by Using 24-Hour Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

Background and Objectives

We estimated the prevalence of hypertension and hypertension subtypes in a large semi-urban city in Korea, using 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) in a randomly selected sample population.

Subjects and Methods

A random sample (aged 20-65 years) from a city with an adult population of approximately 600000 was selected by using a list-assisted random digit dialing method. The 24-hour ABPM and conventional blood pressure measurement (CBPM) of these individuals were obtained.

Results

Among the 496 participants, valid 24-hour ABPM and CBPM were obtained from 462 (93%) individuals. The estimated prevalence of hypertension in Goyang was 17.54% by CBPM and 32.70% by 24-hour ABPM (p<0.01). In the age stratified analysis, both CBPM and 24-hour ABPM showed increased prevalence of hypertension with age. The estimated prevalence of masked hypertension was 16.22% and that of white-coat hypertension was 1.08%. Men had a higher prevalence of masked hypertension than women (20.79% vs. 11.86%, p=0.0295). The estimated prevalence of masked hypertension was 17.5%, 20.58%, 24.34%, and 13.29% in the age categories of 30s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, respectively. The estimated prevalence of masked uncontrolled hypertension was 26.79% in patients with hypertension who were taking antihypertensive medications.

Conclusion

The estimated prevalence of hypertension by 24-hour ABPM was higher than that by CBPM, revealing high prevalence of masked hypertension. The high prevalence of masked hypertension supports the adoption of ABPM in the national population survey and clinical practice to improve public health and reduce health care costs.

Validation of the Withings BP-800 in pregnancy and impact of maternal characteristics on the accuracy of blood pressure measurement

OBJECTIVE

Firstly, to validate the Withings BP-800 automated device for use in pregnancy and, secondly, to assess the impact of maternal somatometric and demographic variables on the accuracy of the device.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

Kings College Hospital, London, UK.

POPULATION

Forty-seven women of any gestation.

METHODS

Validation: The British Hypertension Society (BHS) Protocol (1993) was used for the validation of the Withings BP-800. Two trained observers took nine sequential same arm measurements alternating between the Withings BP-800 and the mercury sphygmomanometer. Assessment of factors affecting the disagreement between the two devices: The associations between discrepancies in the measured systolic and diastolic blood pressure by the two devices and potential predictors of discrepancy and/or possible confounders of associations including age, gestational age, ethnicity, body mass index and arm circumference were investigated using two-level mixed effects models to take into account the repeated measurements.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Accuracy of the Withings BP-800 based on the grading criteria of the BHS Protocol (1993).

RESULTS

The Withings BP-800 failed to meet the validation criteria of the BHS protocol for pregnancy and preeclampsia. Inter-device discrepancy was significantly associated with larger arm circumferences and was more pronounced with diastolic blood pressure. This relationship was independent of other maternal characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS

The Withings BP-800 cannot be recommended for the measurement of blood pressure in pregnancy or preeclampsia. The inaccuracy of the Withings BP-800 increases when used in patients with larger arm circumferences with a propensity to over-read.

Diagnostic and predictive accuracy of blood pressure screening methods with consideration of rescreening intervals: a systematic review for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

BACKGROUND

Elevated blood pressure (BP) is the largest contributing risk factor to all-cause and cardiovascular mortality.

PURPOSE

To update a systematic review on the benefits and harms of screening for high BP in adults and to summarize evidence on rescreening intervals and diagnostic and predictive accuracy of different BP methods for cardiovascular events.

DATA SOURCES

Selected databases searched through 24 February 2014.

STUDY SELECTION

Fair- and good-quality trials and diagnostic accuracy and cohort studies conducted in adults and published in English.

DATA EXTRACTION

One investigator abstracted data, and a second checked for accuracy. Study quality was dual-reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) predicted long-term cardiovascular outcomes independently of office BP (hazard ratio range, 1.28 to 1.40, in 11 studies). Across 27 studies, 35% to 95% of persons with an elevated BP at screening remained hypertensive after nonoffice confirmatory testing. Cardiovascular outcomes in persons who were normotensive after confirmatory testing (isolated clinic hypertension) were similar to outcomes in those who were normotensive at screening. In 40 studies, hypertension incidence after rescreening varied considerably at each yearly interval up to 6 years. Intrastudy comparisons showed at least 2-fold higher incidence in older adults, those with high-normal BP, overweight and obese persons, and African Americans.

LIMITATION

Few diagnostic accuracy studies of office BP methods and protocols in untreated adults.

CONCLUSION

Evidence supports ABPM as the reference standard for confirming elevated office BP screening results to avoid misdiagnosis and overtreatment of persons with isolated clinic hypertension. Persons with BP in the high-normal range, older persons, those with an above-normal body mass index, and African Americans are at higher risk for hypertension on rescreening within 6 years than are persons without these risk factors.

PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE

Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.