Comparison of Ambulatory Tonometric and Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitoring in Hypertensive Patients

Screening for hypertension in adults - the use of tonometric blood pressure monitoring

OBJECTIVES

Arterial hypertension increases the risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Reliable screening tools for diagnosing hypertension are important to ensure correct risk stratification of subjects. In this study, we aimed to analyse if a wrist-worn device using a tonometric technique for measuring of 24-hour blood pressure could be used to diagnose hypertension and non-dipping. A conventional device using oscillometric measurements was used as golden standard. Secondary aim was to compare the degree of discomfort related to monitoring with the two devices.

METHODS

In 89 subjects with a history of normal blood pressure and naive to ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM), 24-hour ABPM was measured simultaneously with A&D TM2430 (oscillometric technique) and BPro (tonometric technique).

RESULTS

When comparing measurements from the two devices, we found that the tonometric device misclassified 46% of hypertensive subjects and 69% of non-dippers. The tonometric device measured significantly lower systolic 24-hour and daytime blood pressure. The subjects reported less discomfort related to the tonometric than the oscillometric device.

CONCLUSION

Despite less discomfort related to usage of the tonometric device for 24-hour blood pressure monitoring compared to an oscillometric device, misclassification of hypertension and non-dipping makes the tonometric device inappropriate as a screening instrument.

Wearable blood pressure measurement devices and new approaches in hypertension management: the digital era

Out-of-office blood pressure (BP) measurement is considered an integral component of the diagnostic algorithm and management of hypertension. In the era of digitalization, a great deal of wearable BP measuring devices has been developed. These digital blood pressure monitors allow frequent BP measurements with minimal annoyance to the patient while they do promise radical changes regarding the diagnostic accuracy, as the importance of making an accurate diagnosis of hypertension has become evident. By increasing the number of BP measurements in different conditions, these monitors allow accurate identification of different clinical phenotypes, such as masked hypertension and pathological BP variability, that seem to have a negative impact on cardiovascular prognosis. Frequent measurements of BP and the incorporation of new features in BP variability, both enable well-rounded interpretation of BP data in the context of real-life settings. This article is a review of all different technologies and wearable BP monitoring devices.

Validation of the BPro radial pulse waveform acquisition device in pregnancy and gestational hypertensive disorders

OBJECTIVE

To validate the BPro blood pressure (BP) wrist device for use in pregnancy and preeclampsia according to the Universal Standard protocol.

PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS

BP was measured sequentially in 45 pregnant women (including 15 with preeclampsia, 15 with gestational hypertension and 15 who remained normotensive) alternating between a mercury sphygmomanometer and BPro device.

RESULTS

The BPro is accurate in pregnancy with a mean device-observer difference of -1.7 ± 6.1 and 0.1 ± 4.6 mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. In women with preeclampsia, BPro also met the validation criteria for the Universal Standard protocol with a mean device-observer difference of -2.7 ± 7.1 and 0.3 ± 4.7 mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively. However, the number of absolute BP differences within 5 mmHg was considerably fewer in those with preeclampsia when compared to the other two subgroups.

CONCLUSION

The BPro device can be recommended for BP measurement in pregnancy but should be used with caution in those with confirmed preeclampsia.

Patient preferences for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring devices: Wrist-type or arm-type?

BACKGROUND

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is important in evaluating average 24-hour blood pressure (BP) levels, circadian rhythm, sleeping BP and BP variability but many patients are reluctant to use standard ABPM devices.

METHODS

We compared two validated ABPM devices, the BPro tonometric wrist monitor and the A&D TM-2430 oscillometric upper arm monitor, for agreement of recordings and acceptability in 37 hypertensive patients (aged 55±9 years).

RESULTS

Successful BP measurements were less frequent with the wrist-type than the arm-type device during the sleeping (66.3% vs. 92.9%, P <0.01) and awake periods (56.2% vs. 86.5%, P <0.01). Comparable paired readings showed no significant difference in systolic BP but diastolic BP (DBP) values were higher with the wrist compared to the arm monitor (24-hour 89±13 vs. 85±14 mmHg, P <0.01) with similar differences awake and sleeping. Bland-Altman analysis showed some large discrepancies between individual arm and wrist monitor measurements. More patients found the wrist monitor more comfortable to use than the arm monitor.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the difference in individual BP measurements and the systematic overestimation of DBP values with the BPro device, wrist monitors with good patient acceptability may be useful to facilitate ABPM in some patients to provide additional information about cardiovascular risk and response to antihypertensive therapies.

Comparison of a tonometric with an oscillometric blood pressure monitoring device over 24 hours of ambulatory use

PURPOSE

Multiple devices capable of measuring ambulatory blood pressure without cuffs have been recently developed and it is required that they offer high-accuracy measurements. The purpose of this prospective study was to compare the performance of a tonometric blood pressure monitor with that of an oscillometric cuff-based device used as a reference in healthy and hypertensive subjects over 24 hours of ambulatory use.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Conventional oscillometric cuff-based device (Oscar 2; Sun Tech Medical) was placed in the left arm of 33 subjects, and a watch-type device based on the tonometric method (Bpro; HealthSTATS International, Singapore) was positioned in the right wrist. Both devices were synchronized to measure simultaneously over 24 hours.

RESULTS

The difference between the means over 24 hours of the oscillometric and the tonometric devices was -0.9 mmHg for SBP and -4.5 mmHg for DBP; the standard deviations were 14.7 and 12.2 mmHg, respectively. Greater differences in bias and dispersion were observed overnight than during the daytime. The accuracy of the tonometric device for diagnosing hypertension was 75% and for detecting the non-dipper profile, 48%.

CONCLUSION

The test device presented a high disagreement (especially during the night) compared to the oscillometric cuff-based device against which it was initially calibrated. This disagreement resulted in limited accuracy for diagnosing patients with suspected arterial hypertension and detecting non-dipper profiles.