Comparison of non-invasive and invasive blood pressure in aeromedical care

Non-invasive versus arterial pressure monitoring in the pre-hospital critical care environment: a paired comparison of concurrently recorded measurements

BACKGROUND

Blood pressure monitoring is important in the pre-hospital management of critically ill patients. Non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements are commonly used but the accuracy of standard oscillometric cuff devices may be affected by extremes of physiology and adverse conditions (e.g. vibration) during transport. This study aimed to quantify the accuracy of NIBP measurements amongst patients requiring pre-hospital critical care.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was undertaken using data from patients treated by a pre-hospital critical team between 1st May 2020 and 30th April 2023 that had NIBP measured concurrently with invasive blood pressure (IBP) arterial manometry. An acceptable difference was determined a priori to be < 20mmHg for systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and < 10mmHg for mean arterial pressure (MAP). The primary outcome was "pairwise agreement", i.e. the proportion of paired observations that fell within this range of acceptability. Bland-Altman plots were constructed together with 95% limits of agreement to visualise differences between pairs of data. Associations with patient age, reason for critical care, transport status, haemodynamic shock, severe hypertension, and arterial catheter position were explored in univariate analyses and by fitting multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

There were 2,359 paired measurements from 221 individual patients with a median age of 57. The most frequent reason for transport was cardiac arrest (79, 35.7%). Bland-Altman analyses suggested unacceptably wide limits of agreement with NIBP overestimating both SBP and MAP during hypotension and underestimating these values during hypertension. Haemodynamic shock (SBP < 90mmHg) was independently associated with reduced pairwise agreement for SBP (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.52, 95% CI 0.35 to 0.77), DBP (aOR 0.65, 95% CI 0.42 to 0.99) and MAP (aOR 0.53, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.78) and severe hypertension (SBP > 160mmHg) with reduced pairwise agreement for SBP (aOR 0.17, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.27). There was no association between patient transport and agreement between the methods for SBP, DBP, or MAP.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-invasive blood pressure measurements are often inaccurate in the pre-hospital critical care setting, particularly in patients with haemodynamic instability. Clinicians should be cautious when interpreting NIBP measurements and consider direct arterial pressure monitoring when circumstances allow.

Prehospital invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring in critically ill patients attended by a UK helicopter emergency medical service- a retrospective observational review of practice

BACKGROUND

Accurate haemodynamic monitoring in the prehospital setting is essential. Non-invasive blood pressure measurement is susceptible to vibration and motion artefact, especially at extremes of hypotension and hypertension: invasive arterial blood pressure (IABP) monitoring is a potential solution. This study describes the largest series to date of cases of IABP monitoring being initiated prehospital.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study was conducted at East Anglian Air Ambulance (EAAA), a UK helicopter emergency medical service (HEMS). It included all patients attended by EAAA who underwent arterial catheterisation and initiation of IABP monitoring between 1st February 2015 and 20th April 2023. The following data were retrieved for all patients: sex; age; aetiology (medical cardiac arrest, other medical emergency, trauma); site of arterial cannulation; operator role (doctor/paramedic); time of insertion and, where applicable, times of pre-hospital emergency anaesthesia, and return of spontaneous circulation following cardiac arrest. Descriptive analyses were performed to characterise the sample.

RESULTS

13,556 patients were attended: IABP monitoring was initiated in 1083 (8.0%) cases, with a median age 59 years, of which 70.8% were male. 546 cases were of medical cardiac arrest: in 22.4% of these IABP monitoring was initiated during cardiopulmonary resuscitation. 322 were trauma cases, and the remaining 215 were medical emergencies. The patients were critically unwell: 981 required intubation, of which 789 underwent prehospital emergency anaesthesia; 609 received vasoactive medication. In 424 cases IABP monitoring was instituted en route to hospital.

CONCLUSION

This study describes over 1000 cases of prehospital arterial catheterisation and IABP monitoring in a UK HEMS system and has demonstrated feasibility at scale. The high-fidelity of invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring with the additional benefit of arterial blood gas analysis presents an attractive translation of in-hospital critical care to the prehospital setting.

Aeromedical Transportation of the Critically Ill Cardiac Patient: In-flight Considerations and Management

The aeromedical transportation (AMT) of critically ill cardiac patients can enable access to advanced specialized medical attention, or provide improved care for operational, psychosocial, political, or economic reasons. However, AMT is a complex undertaking necessitating extensive clinical, operational, administrative, and logistical planning to ensure that the patient receives an equivalent level of critical care monitoring and management in the air as on the ground. This paper is the second of a 2-part series. Part 1 focused on the preflight planning and preparation for critically ill cardiac patients during AMT aboard commercial platforms, while this current part aims to provide an overview of in-flight considerations for the same population.

Interfacility Transport of Critically Ill Patients

OBJECTIVES

To assess recent advances in interfacility critical care transport.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed English language publications plus chapters and professional organization publications.

STUDY SELECTION

Manuscripts including practice manuals and standard (1990-2021) focused on interfacility transport of critically ill patients.

DATA EXTRACTION

Review of society guidelines, legislative requirements, objective measures of outcomes, and transport practice standards occurred in work groups assessing definitions and foundations of interfacility transport, transport team composition, and transport specific considerations. Qualitative analysis was performed to characterize current science regarding interfacility transport.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The Task Force conducted an integrative review of 496 manuscripts combined with 120 from the authors' collections including nonpeer reviewed publications. After title and abstract screening, 40 underwent full-text review, of which 21 remained for qualitative synthesis.

CONCLUSIONS

Since 2004, there have been numerous advances in critical care interfacility transport. Clinical deterioration may be mitigated by appropriate patient selection, pretransport optimization, and transport by a well-resourced team and vehicle. There remains a dearth of high-quality controlled studies, but notable advances in monitoring, en route management, transport modality (air vs ground), as well as team composition and training serve as foundations for future inquiry. Guidance from professional organizations remains uncoupled from enforceable regulations, impeding standardization of transport program quality assessment and verification.

Systolic blood pressure measurements are unreliable for the management of acute spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage

PURPOSE

Whether systolic blood pressure (SBP) is reliable in acute spontaneous intracerebral (sICH) by assessing agreement between simultaneous BP measurements obtained from cuff non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) and radial arterial invasive blood pressure (AIBP) devices.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Among 766 prospectively screened sICH subjects, 303 (39.5%) had NIBP and AIBP measurements. During the first 24 h, 2157 simultaneous paired measurement readings were abstracted. Paired NIBP/AIBP measurements were included in a Bland-Altman technique with 95% agreement limits and coefficients from regression analysis derived from a bootstrap procedure.

RESULTS

Variance for SBP was 66.1 mmHg, which was larger than the 44.3 mg Hg for diastolic blood pressure (DBP) or the 46.1 mmHg for mean arterial pressure (MAP). Pairwise comparison of mean biases showed a significant difference between SBP when compared to DBP (p < 0.0001) or MAP (p < 0.0001). The mean bias between DBP and MAP was not different (p = 0.68). Regression-based Bland Altman analysis found significant bias (slope -0.16, 95% CI -0.23, -0.09, p < 0.05) over the range of mean SBP. Bias over the range of mean DBP or MAP was not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that SBP is an unreliable blood pressure measurement in patients with sICH.

Initiation of Invasive Arterial Pressure Monitoring by Critical Care Transport Crews

Noninvasive blood pressure monitoring is convenient in the prehospital setting, but its use in the critically ill patient should be carefully considered given documented inaccuracies. Countless therapeutic patient interventions are based on blood pressure parameters, and the prehospital paramedic, nurse, and physician should strongly consider the use of invasive blood pressure monitoring, especially during critical care transport. Radial artery cannulation for arterial blood pressure monitoring is a safe and effective procedure that can reasonably be performed in the prehospital setting by both physicians and nonphysicians. Critical care transport teams should consider clinical guidelines that outline indications and training to safely implement this as a clinical skill.

Comparing Intra-Arterial, Auscultatory, and Oscillometric Measurement Methods for Arterial Blood Pressure

AIM

This study aimed to compare the measurement results of arterial blood pressure obtained through intra-arterial, auscultatory, and oscillometric methods.

METHOD

This prospective and descriptive study was conducted with 180 patients hospitalized in the intensive care units of cardiovascular surgery and anesthesia. Arterial blood pressures of the patients in the study were measured with 3 methods, and the mean arterial pressure values obtained by each method were analyzed to find out whether they were different or consistent.

RESULTS

The average systolic blood pressure value using the intra-arterial method was found to be 125.47 ± 21.39 mm Hg, and the average of diastolic blood pressure measurement obtained using the oscillometric method was the highest (73.91 ± 10.62 mm Hg). The highest correlation was seen between the arterial BP measurements of the intra-arterial and auscultatory methods (systolic [0.96] and diastolic [0.90]). According to the British and Irish Hypertension Society protocol, a very good agreement between the diastolic blood pressure values and a good agreement between the systolic blood pressure values were obtained.

CONCLUSION

The measurement results obtained through the auscultatory method more consistent with the results obtained through the intra-arterial method compared with those obtained using the oscillometric method.

Aeromedical Transport of Critically Ill Patients: A Literature Review

The aeromedical transport of critically ill patients has become an integral part of practicing medicine on a global scale. The development of reliable portable medical equipment allows physicians, emergency medical technicians, and nurses to transport wounded and diseased patients under constant critical care attention. Air transportation involves utilizing a fixed-wing (airplane) or rotor-wing (helicopter) aircraft to accomplish different types of transports ranging from scene responses to international transfers. The proper preparation and management of patients undergoing aeromedical transport require a basic understanding of the physiological changes and unique challenges encountered within the aircraft environment at 8,000 ft above sea level. The purpose of this paper is to review the literature and provide guidelines for approaching the aeromedical transportation of critically ill patients.

Prehospital clinical signs are a poor predictor of raised intracranial pressure following traumatic brain injury

Background

For the prehospital diagnosis of raised intracranial pressure (ICP), clinicians are reliant on clinical signs such as the Glasgow Coma Score (GCS), pupillary response and/or Cushing’s triad (hypertension, bradycardia and an irregular breathing pattern). This study aimed to explore the diagnostic accuracy of these signs as indicators of a raised ICP.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study of adult patients attended by a Helicopter Emergency Medical Service (Air Ambulance Kent, Surrey Sussex), who had sustained a traumatic brain injury (TBI), requiring prehospital anaesthesia between 1 January 2016 and 1 January 2018. We established optimal cut-off values for clinical signs to identify patients with a raised ICP and investigated diagnostic accuracy for combinations of these values.

Results

Outcome data for 249 patients with TBI were available, of which 87 (35%) had a raised ICP. Optimal cut-off points for systolic blood pressure (SBP), heart rate (HR) and pupil diameter to discriminate patients with a raised ICP were, respectively, >160 mm Hg,<60 bpm and >5 mm. Cushing criteria (SBP >160 mm Hg and HR <60 bpm) and pupillary response and size were complimentary in their ability to detect patients with a raised ICP. The presence of a fixed blown pupil or a Cushing’s response had a specificity of 93.2 (88.2–96.6)%, and a positive likelihood ratio (LR+) of 5.4 (2.9–10.2), whereas sensitivity and LR− were only 36.8 (26.7–47.8)% and 0.7 (0.6–0.8), respectively, (Area Under the Curve (AUC) 0.65 (0.57–0.73)). Sensitivity analysis revealed that optimal cut-off values and resultant accuracy were dependent on injury pattern.

Conclusion

Traditional clinical signs of raised ICP may under triage patients to prehospital treatment with hyperosmolar drugs. Further research should identify more accurate clinical signs or alternative non-invasive diagnostic aids in the prehospital environment.

Data quality of Glasgow Coma Scale and Systolic Blood Pressure in scientific studies involving physician-staffed emergency medical services: Systematic review

BACKGROUND

Emergency physicians on-scene provide highly specialized care to severely sick or injured patients. High-quality research relies on the quality of data, but no commonly accepted definition of EMS data quality exits. Glasgow Coma Score (GCS) and Systolic Blood Pressure (SBP) are core physiological variables, but little is known about the quality of these data when reported in p-EMS research. This systematic review aims to describe the quality of pre-hospital reporting of GCS and SBP data in studies where emergency physicians are present on-scene.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed using CINAHL, Cochrane, Embase, Medline, Norart, Scopus, SweMed + and Web of Science, in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Reported data on accuracy of reporting, completeness and capture were extracted to describe the quality of documentation of GCS and SBP. External and internal validity assessment was performed by extracting a set of predefined variables.

RESULTS

We included 137 articles describing data collection for GCS, SBP or both. Most studies (81%) were conducted in Europe and 59% of studies reported trauma cases. Reporting of GCS and SBP data were not uniform and may be improved to enable comparisons. Of the predefined external and internal validity data items, 26%-45% of data were possible to extract from the included papers.

CONCLUSIONS

Reporting of GCS and SBP is variable in scientific papers. We recommend standardized reporting to enable comparisons of p-EMS.

A Comparison of Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Measurement Strategies with Intra-Arterial Measurement

Introduction:

It is difficult to obtain an accurate blood pressure (BP) measurement, especially in the prehospital environment. It is not known fully how various BP measurement techniques differ from one another.

Study Objective:

The study hypothesized that there are differences in the accuracy of various non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurement strategies as compared to the gold standard of intra-arterial (IA) measurement.

Methods:

The study enrolled adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients with radial IA catheters placed to measure radial intra-arterial blood pressure (RIBP) as a part of their standard care at a large, urban, tertiary-care Level I trauma center. Systolic blood pressure (SBP) was taken by three different NIBP techniques (oscillometric, auscultated, and palpated) and compared to RIBP measurements. Data were analyzed using the paired t-test with dependent samples to detect differences between RIBP measurements and each NIBP method. The primary outcome was the difference in RIBP and NIBP measurement. There was also a predetermined subgroup analysis based on gender, body mass index (BMI), primary diagnosis requiring IA line placement, and current vasoactive medication use.

Results:

Forty-four patients were enrolled to detect a predetermined clinically significant difference of 5mmHg in SBP. The patient population was 63.6% male and 36.4% female with an average age of 58.4 years old. The most common primary diagnoses were septic shock (47.7%), stroke (13.6%), and increased intracranial pressure (ICP; 13.6%). Most patients were receiving some form of sedation (63.4%), while 50.0% were receiving vasopressor medication and 31.8% were receiving anti-hypertensive medication. When compared to RIBP values, only the palpated SBP values had a clinically significant difference (9.88mmHg less than RIBP; P < .001). When compared to RIBP, the oscillometric and auscultated SBP readings showed statistically but not clinically significant lower values. The palpated method also showed a clinically significant lower SBP reading than the oscillometric method (5.48mmHg; P < .001) and the auscultated method (5.06mmHg; P < .001). There was no significant difference between the oscillometric and auscultated methods (0.42mmHg; P = .73).

Conclusion:

Overall, NIBPs significantly under-estimated RIBP measurements. Palpated BP measurements were consistently lower than RIBP, which was statistically and clinically significant. These results raise concern about the accuracy of palpated BP and its pervasive use in prehospital care. The data also suggested that auscultated and oscillometric BP may provide similar measurements.

Accuracy and Reliability of a Disposable Vascular Pressure Device for Arterial Pressure Monitoring in Critical Care Transport

OBJECTIVE

Arterial catheterization is a commonly performed procedure in intensive care units to guide the management of critically ill patients who require precise hemodynamic monitoring; however, this technology is not always available in the transport setting because of cumbersome and expensive equipment requirements. We compared the accuracy and reliability of a disposable vascular pressure device (DVPD) with the gold standard (ie, the transducer pressure bag invasive arterial monitoring system) used in intensive care units to determine if the DVPD can be reliably used in place of the traditional pressure transducer setup.

METHODS

This study was a single-center, prospective, observational study performed in the adult intensive care unit of a large academic university hospital. A convenience cohort of hemodynamically stable, adult critically ill patients with femoral, brachial, or radial arterial catheters was recruited for this study. The Compass pressure device (Centurion Medical Products, Williamston, MI) is a disposable vascular pressure-sensing device used to assure venous access versus inadvertent arterial access during central line placement. The DVPD was attached to an in situ arterial catheter and measures the mean intravascular pressure via an embedded sensor and displays the pressure via the integrated LCD screen. Using a 3-way stopcock, the DVPD was compared with the standard arterial setup. We compared the mean arterial pressure (MAP) in the standard setup with the DVPD using Bland-Altman plots and methods that accounted for repeated measures in the same subject.

RESULTS

Data were collected on 14 of the 15 subjects enrolled. Five measurements were obtained on each patient comparing the DVPD with the standard arterial setup at 1-minute intervals over the course of 5 minutes. A total of 70 observations were made. Among the 15 subjects, most (10 [67%]) were radial or brachial sites. The average MAP scores and standard deviation values obtained by the standard setup were 83.5 mm Hg (14.8) and 81.1 mm Hg (19.3) using the DVPD. Just over half (51.4%) of the measurements were within a ± 5-mm Hg difference. Using Bland-Altman plotting methods, standard arterial measurements were 2.4 mm Hg higher (95% confidence interval, 0.60-4.1) than with the DVPD. Differences between the 2 devices varied significantly across MAP values. The standard arterial line measurements were significantly higher than the DVPD at low MAP values, whereas the DVPD measurements were significantly higher than the standard arterial line at high MAP values.

CONCLUSION

The DVPD provides a reasonable estimate of MAP and may be suitable for arterial pressure monitoring in settings where standard monitoring setups are not available. The DVPD appears to provide "worst-case" values because it underestimates low arterial blood pressure and overestimates high arterial blood pressure. Future trials should investigate the DVPD under different physiological conditions (eg, hypotensive patients, patients with ventricular assist devices, and patients on extracorporeal membrane oxygenation), different patient populations (such as pediatric patients), and in different environments (prehospital, air medical transport, and austere locations).

Cerebral Oxygenation in Traumatic Brain Injury: Can a Non-Invasive Frequency Domain Near-Infrared Spectroscopy Device Detect Changes in Brain Tissue Oxygen Tension as Well as the Established Invasive Monitor?

The cost and highly invasive nature of brain monitoring modality in traumatic brain injury patients currently restrict its utility to specialist neurological intensive care settings. We aim to test the abilities of a frequency domain near-infrared spectroscopy (FD-NIRS) device in predicting changes in invasively measured brain tissue oxygen tension. Individuals admitted to a United Kingdom specialist major trauma center were contemporaneously monitored with an FD-NIRS device and invasively measured brain tissue oxygen tension probe. Area under the curve receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) statistical analysis was utilized to assess the predictive power of FD-NIRS in detecting both moderate and severe hypoxia (20 and 10 mm Hg, respectively) as measured invasively. Sixteen individuals were prospectively recruited to the investigation. Severe hypoxic episodes were detected in nine of these individuals, with the NIRS demonstrating a broad range of predictive abilities (AUROC 0.68-0.88) from relatively poor to good. Moderate hypoxic episodes were detected in seven individuals with similar predictive performance (AUROC 0.576-0.905). A variable performance in the predictive powers of this FD-NIRS device to detect changes in brain tissue oxygen was demonstrated. Consequently, this enhanced NIRS technology has not demonstrated sufficient ability to replace the established invasive measurement.

Closed-Loop- and Decision-Assist-Guided Fluid Therapy of Human Hemorrhage

OBJECTIVES

We sought to evaluate the efficacy, efficiency, and physiologic consequences of automated, endpoint-directed resuscitation systems and compare them to formula-based bolus resuscitation.

DESIGN

Experimental human hemorrhage and resuscitation.

SETTING

Clinical research laboratory.

SUBJECTS

Healthy volunteers.

INTERVENTIONS

Subjects (n = 7) were subjected to hemorrhage and underwent a randomized fluid resuscitation scheme on separate visits 1) formula-based bolus resuscitation; 2) semiautonomous (decision assist) fluid administration; and 3) fully autonomous (closed loop) resuscitation. Hemodynamic variables, volume shifts, fluid balance, and cardiac function were monitored during hemorrhage and resuscitation. Treatment modalities were compared based on resuscitation efficacy and efficiency.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

All approaches achieved target blood pressure by 60 minutes. Following hemorrhage, the total amount of infused fluid (bolus resuscitation: 30 mL/kg, decision assist: 5.6 ± 3 mL/kg, closed loop: 4.2 ± 2 mL/kg; p < 0.001), plasma volume, extravascular volume (bolus resuscitation: 17 ± 4 mL/kg, decision assist: 3 ± 1 mL/kg, closed loop: -0.3 ± 0.3 mL/kg; p < 0.001), body weight, and urinary output remained stable under decision assist and closed loop and were significantly increased under bolus resuscitation. Mean arterial pressure initially decreased further under bolus resuscitation (-10 mm Hg; p < 0.001) and was lower under bolus resuscitation than closed loop at 20 minutes (bolus resuscitation: 57 ± 2 mm Hg, closed loop: 69 ± 4 mm Hg; p = 0.036). Colloid osmotic pressure (bolus resuscitation: 19.3 ± 2 mm Hg, decision assist, closed loop: 24 ± 0.4 mm Hg; p < 0.05) and hemoglobin concentration were significantly decreased after bolus fluid administration.

CONCLUSIONS

We define efficacy of decision-assist and closed-loop resuscitation in human hemorrhage. In comparison with formula-based bolus resuscitation, both semiautonomous and autonomous approaches were more efficient in goal-directed resuscitation of hemorrhage. They provide favorable conditions for the avoidance of over-resuscitation and its adverse clinical sequelae. Decision-assist and closed-loop resuscitation algorithms are promising technological solutions for constrained environments and areas of limited resources.

Relationship between Hypotension and Cerebral Ischemia during Hemodialysis

The relationship between BP and downstream ischemia during hemodialysis has not been characterized. We studied the dynamic relationship between BP, real-time symptoms, and cerebral oxygenation during hemodialysis, using continuous BP and cerebral oxygenation measurements prospectively gathered from 635 real-world hemodialysis sessions in 58 prevalent patients. We examined the relationship between BP and cerebral ischemia (relative drop in cerebral saturation >15%) and explored the lower limit of cerebral autoregulation at patient and population levels. Furthermore, we estimated intradialytic exposure to cerebral ischemia and hypotension for each patient, and entered these values into multivariate models predicting change in cognitive function. In all, 23.5% of hemodialysis sessions featured cerebral ischemia; 31.9% of these events were symptomatic. Episodes of hypotension were common, with mean arterial pressure falling by a median of 22 mmHg (interquartile range, 14.3-31.9 mmHg) and dropping below 60 mmHg in 24% of sessions. Every 10 mmHg drop from baseline in mean arterial pressure associated with a 3% increase in ischemic events (P<0.001), and the incidence of ischemic events rose rapidly below an absolute mean arterial pressure of 60 mmHg. Overall, however, BP poorly predicted downstream ischemia. The lower limit of cerebral autoregulation varied substantially (mean 74.1 mmHg, SD 17.6 mmHg). Intradialytic cerebral ischemia, but not hypotension, correlated with decreased executive cognitive function at 12 months (P=0.03). This pilot study demonstrates that intradialytic cerebral ischemia occurs frequently, is not easily predicted from BP, and may be clinically significant.

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.

Noninvasive techniques for blood pressure measurement are not a reliable alternative to direct measurement: a randomized crossover trial in ICU

INTRODUCTION

Noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) monitoring methods are widely used in critically ill patients despite poor evidence of their accuracy. The erroneous interpretations of blood pressure (BP) may lead to clinical errors.

OBJECTIVES

To test the accuracy and reliability of aneroid (ABP) and oscillometric (OBP) devices compared to the invasive BP (IBP) monitoring in an ICU population.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Fifty adult patients (200 comparisons) were included in a randomized crossover trial. BP was recorded simultaneously by IBP and either by ABP or by OBP, taking IBP as gold standard.

RESULTS

Compared with ABP, IBP systolic values were significantly higher (mean difference ± standard deviation 9.74 ± 13.8; P < 0.0001). Both diastolic (-5.13 ± 7.1; P < 0.0001) and mean (-2.14 ± 7.1; P=0.0033) IBP were instead lower. Compared with OBP, systolic (10.80 ± 14.9; P < 0.0001) and mean (5.36 ± 7.1; P < 0.0001) IBP were higher, while diastolic IBP (-3.62 ± 6.0; P < 0.0001) was lower. Bland-Altman plots showed wide limits of agreement in both NIBP-IBP comparisons.

CONCLUSIONS

BP measurements with different devices produced significantly different results. Since in critically ill patients the importance of BP readings is often crucial, noninvasive techniques cannot be regarded as reliable alternatives to direct measurements.