Whincup P H, Bruce N G, Cook D G, Shaper A G
Department of Public Health, Royal Free Hospital and School of Medicine, London, United Kingdom.
J Epidemiol Community Health. 1992 Apr;46(2):164-9. doi: 10.1136/jech.46.2.164.
The aim was to compare the performance of the Dinamap 1846SX automated oscillometric blood pressure recorder with that of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer during use under field study conditions.
Two independent within subject measurement comparisons were made, one in adults and one in children, each conducted in three stages over several months while the Dinamap instruments were being used in epidemiological field surveys.
The studies were done in outpatients clinics (adults) and primary schools (children).
141 adults (20-85 years) and 152 children (5-7 years) took part.
In adults a pair of measurements was made with each instrument, the order alternating for consecutive subjects. In children one measurements was made with each instrument, in random order. Measurements with the Dinamap 1846SX were higher than those with the random zero sphygmomanometer both in adults (mean difference 8.1 mm Hg; 95% CI 6.5 to 9.7 mm Hg) and in children (mean difference 8.3 mm Hg; 95% CI 6.9 to 9.7 mm Hg). Diastolic measurements were on average very similar both in adults and in children. The results were consistent at all three stages of both studies. The differences in systolic measurement were independent of blood pressure level. However, the extent of agreement in diastolic pressure depended on the diastolic blood pressure level; in both studies Dinamap diastolic measurements were higher at low diastolic pressures while random zero diastolic measurements were higher at high diastolic pressures.
Systolic measurements made with the Dinamap 1846SX instrument are not directly comparable with those of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer and are unlikely to be comparable with those of earlier Dinamap models. These differences have important implications for clinical practice and for comparisons of blood pressure measurement between epidemiological studies. However, the consistency of measurement by the Dinamap 1846SX over time suggests that the instrument may have a place in standardised blood pressure measurement in the research setting.
本研究旨在比较在现场研究条件下使用时,Dinamap 1846SX自动振荡式血压记录仪与Hawksley随机零位血压计的性能。
进行了两项独立的受试者内测量比较,一项针对成年人,一项针对儿童,每项比较均分三个阶段在数月内进行,在此期间Dinamap仪器正用于流行病学现场调查。
研究在门诊诊所(针对成年人)和小学(针对儿童)进行。
141名成年人(20 - 85岁)和152名儿童(5 - 7岁)参与了研究。
在成年人中,使用每种仪器进行一对测量,连续受试者的测量顺序交替。在儿童中,使用每种仪器进行一次测量,测量顺序随机。在成年人中,Dinamap 1846SX的测量值高于随机零位血压计的测量值(平均差异8.1毫米汞柱;95%置信区间6.5至9.7毫米汞柱),在儿童中也是如此(平均差异8.3毫米汞柱;95%置信区间6.9至9.7毫米汞柱)。成年人和儿童的舒张压测量值平均非常相似。两项研究的所有三个阶段结果均一致。收缩压测量的差异与血压水平无关。然而,舒张压的一致性程度取决于舒张压水平;在两项研究中,Dinamap的舒张压测量值在低舒张压时较高,而随机零位的舒张压测量值在高舒张压时较高。
使用Dinamap 1846SX仪器进行的收缩压测量与Hawksley随机零位血压计的测量值不可直接比较,也不太可能与早期Dinamap型号的测量值相比较。这些差异对临床实践以及流行病学研究之间的血压测量比较具有重要意义。然而,Dinamap 1846SX随时间测量的一致性表明,该仪器在研究环境中的标准化血压测量中可能占有一席之地。