國家衛生研究院 NHRI:Item 3990099045/7104
English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Items with full text/Total items : 12145/12927 (94%)
Visitors : 857842      Online Users : 837
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://ir.nhri.org.tw/handle/3990099045/7104


    Title: Measurement accuracy of a stand-alone oscillometric central blood pressure monitor: A validation report for microlife watchBP office central
    Authors: Cheng, HM;Sung, SH;Shih, YT;Chuang, SY;Yu, WC;Chen, CH
    Contributors: Division of Health Services and Preventive Medicine
    Abstract: BACKGROUND The superiority of prognostic value of blood pressure (BP) measured at central aorta (CBP) over conventional brachial BP measured by cuff-based BP monitors has reignited the development of new non-invasive techniques for estimating CBP. The present study validated the accuracy of CBP measured by a newly developed stand-alone CBP monitor. METHODS The CBP monitor provided readings of brachial systolic BP (SBP), brachial diastolic BP (DBP), central SBP, and central pulse pressure (PP). Brachial PP and central DBP were calculated from the relevant readings. The accuracy of the brachial and central SBP, PP, and DBP was validated against the simultaneously recorded invasively measured central aortic SBP, PP, and DBP, according to the invasive standard requirements for the noninvasive brachial BP monitors from the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) in 85 subjects (255 measurements; age range, 30-93 years). RESULTS The mean differences of cuff BP with reference to the invasively measured central SBP, PP, and DBP were -2.6 +/- 9.0, -8.6 +/- 11.2, and 6.1 +/- 7.0 mm Hg, respectively, with the former two being obviously underestimated at high CBP and overestimated at low CBP. In contrast, the corresponding differences for the central SBP, PP, and DBP measured by the CBP monitor were -0.6 +/- 5.5, -0.4 +/- 7.0, and -0.2 +/- 6.5 mm Hg, respectively, without obvious systematic bias. The distribution of measurement errors for central SBP, PP, and DBP surpassed the AAMI criteria. CONCLUSION Central SBP, PP, and DBP can be measured accurately by a stand-alone automatic BP monitor.
    Date: 2013-01
    Relation: American Journal of Hypertension. 2013 Jan;26(1):42-50.
    Link to: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hps021
    JIF/Ranking 2023: http://gateway.webofknowledge.com/gateway/Gateway.cgi?GWVersion=2&SrcAuth=NHRI&SrcApp=NHRI_IR&KeyISSN=0895-7061&DestApp=IC2JCR
    Cited Times(WOS): https://www.webofscience.com/wos/woscc/full-record/WOS:000313972600008
    Cited Times(Scopus): http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?partnerID=HzOxMe3b&scp=84876589759
    Appears in Collections:[Shao-Yuan Chuang] Periodical Articles

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    ISI000313972600008.pdf706KbAdobe PDF261View/Open


    All items in NHRI are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

    Related Items in TAIR

    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback