Suppr超能文献

肱动脉血压测量方法的变化显著影响踝肱压力指数值。

Variation of method for measurement of brachial artery pressure significantly affects ankle-brachial pressure index values.

作者信息

Jeelani N U, Braithwaite B D, Tomlin C, MacSweeney S T

机构信息

Academic Department of Vascular Surgery, University Hospital, Nottingham.

出版信息

Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2000 Jul;20(1):25-8. doi: 10.1053/ejvs.2000.1141.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Mmeasurement of ankle brachial pressure indices (ABPI) is important in the assessment of patients with peripheral vascular disease.

METHODS

Thirty-one hospitals with a vascular surgeon were selected at random. A telephone questionnaire was completed to assess the method used for the measurement of ABPI. Following the survey, 14 patients with peripheral vascular disease had their ABPI measurement done by two observers, a pre-registration house officer and a clinical nurse practitioner. Observers were blinded to their own and each other's results. Brachial systolic pressures were obtained using a DINAMAP(TM)(Critikon, Tampa, U.S.A.) automated blood pressure monitor, the Korotkoff method (12 cm cuff, parallel wrap) and an 8 MHz Doppler probe (Huntleigh) and sphygmomanometer. Ankle systolic pressures were obtained using the Doppler probe. The results were analysed using the Wilcoxon signed rank test.

RESULTS

The survey demonstrated that at the majority of centres with vascular laboratories the brachial artery systolic pressures were measured using a Doppler probe. In contrast, at centres where the house officers performed the routine measurements, over 60% used the Korotkoff method to obtain this reading. One in four nurse practitioners used the Korotkoff method. When the ABPI values were calculated, the DINAMAP produced significantly higher median values than the Korotkoff (0.79 vs 0.72, p=0.003) and Doppler methods (0.79 vs 0.70, p<0.0001). The nurse had a higher median ABPI value of 0.76 compared with the doctor (0.71, p=0.01).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that measurement of ABPI varies in different vascular units. The technique for ABPI measurement should be standardised.

摘要

背景

测量踝肱压力指数(ABPI)对于评估外周血管疾病患者很重要。

方法

随机选择31家设有血管外科医生的医院。通过完成一份电话调查问卷来评估测量ABPI所使用的方法。调查之后,14名外周血管疾病患者由两名观察者进行ABPI测量,一名预注册住院医生和一名临床护士从业者。观察者对自己和彼此的测量结果不知情。使用DINAMAP(商标名)(美国坦帕市Critikon公司)自动血压监测仪、柯氏音法(12厘米袖带,平行缠绕)、8兆赫多普勒探头(Huntleigh公司)和血压计获取肱动脉收缩压。使用多普勒探头获取踝部收缩压。结果采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行分析。

结果

调查表明,在大多数设有血管实验室的中心,使用多普勒探头测量肱动脉收缩压。相比之下,在住院医生进行常规测量的中心,超过60%的人使用柯氏音法获取该读数。四分之一的护士从业者使用柯氏音法。计算ABPI值时,DINAMAP得出的中位数显著高于柯氏音法(0.79对0.72,p = 0.003)和多普勒法(0.79对0.70,p < 0.0001)。与医生(0.71)相比,护士的ABPI中位数较高,为0.76(p = 0.01)。

结论

本研究表明,不同血管单位测量ABPI的方法存在差异。ABPI测量技术应标准化。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验