Suppr超能文献

当使用经过验证的腕式或臂式血压计在家中测量血压时,收缩压是不可比的。

[Systolic blood pressures are not comparable when home blood pressure is measured with a wrist or an arm validated monitor].

作者信息

Dourmap-Collas C, Girerd X, Begasse F, Marquand A, Asplanato M, Jaboureck O, Fourcade J, Pierre Justin E, Hottelard C, Hanon O

机构信息

Service d'endocrinologie-Métabolisme, Hôpital de La Pitié-Salpêtrière, Paris.

出版信息

Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss. 2005 Jul-Aug;98(7-8):774-8.

Abstract

OBJECTIVES

To compare home blood pressure values obtained with two validated OMRON (wrist or arm) monitors used sequentially in the same subject.

METHODS

In 265 hypertensive subjects referred to hypertension specialists, a self measurement of blood pressure was performed sequentially with an OMRON M4-I (arm cuff, A/A, BHS validation) or OMRON RX-I (wrist cuff, B/B, BHS validation). Each patient recorded home blood pressure during two periods of 4 days with 3 measures in the morning and 3 in the evening. Order for use of each monitor was randomised. With wrist devices, subjects were advised to keep the arm at heart level during measurements. BP values were reported on a standardized document. Patients were asked by a questionnaire about the tolerance and feasibility of the 2 methods.

RESULTS

In this population, aged 59 +/- 14 years, with 60% of men and a mean blood pressure of 152 +/- 21 / 86 +/- 14 mmHg, the home blood pressure values were 143 +/- 20/81 +/- 11 mmHg with the arm monitor and 135 +/- 10 / 80 +/- 11 mmHg with the wrist monitor. Mean SBP adjusted on age, initial blood pressure level and period order was significantly lower when home blood pressure monitoring has been recorded with a wrist monitor as compared to an arm monitor (p < 0.001). Self measurement of blood pressure was felt as easy in 92% with the arm monitor and in 96% with the wrist monitor (p < 0.05). Self measurement of blood pressure was felt as constraining in 14% with the arm monitor and in 7% with the wrist monitor (p < 0.01). The feasibility between the two devices was good with none of the value missing in 86% with the arm monitor and in 85% with the wrist monitor. The missing values were in 56% the fourth day.

CONCLUSION

Despite the use of two validated monitors, mean SBP is significantly lower when home blood pressure monitoring is recorded with a wrist monitor as compared to an arm monitor. Uncertainty in the arm position with the use of wrist device could explain these results. When advising home blood pressure monitoring, care should be taken to recommend only the use of validated devices and to prefer the use of arm devices in order to avoid the uncertainty of an inadequate utilisation.

摘要

目的

比较同一受试者先后使用两种经验证的欧姆龙(腕式或臂式)血压计测得的家庭血压值。

方法

在265名转诊至高血压专科医生处的高血压患者中,依次使用欧姆龙M4-I(臂式袖带,A/A,符合英国高血压协会(BHS)验证标准)或欧姆龙RX-I(腕式袖带,B/B,符合BHS验证标准)进行血压自我测量。每位患者在两个为期4天的时间段内记录家庭血压,每天早上测量3次,晚上测量3次。每种血压计的使用顺序是随机的。对于腕式血压计,建议受试者在测量时将手臂保持在心脏水平。血压值记录在标准化表格上。通过问卷调查询问患者这两种方法的耐受性和可行性。

结果

在这个年龄为59±14岁、男性占60%、平均血压为152±21 / 86±14 mmHg的人群中,使用臂式血压计测得的家庭血压值为143±20/81±11 mmHg,使用腕式血压计测得的为135±10 / 80±11 mmHg。在根据年龄、初始血压水平和测量顺序进行调整后,与使用臂式血压计相比,使用腕式血压计记录家庭血压时的平均收缩压显著更低(p < 0.001)。92%的患者认为使用臂式血压计进行血压自我测量很容易,96%的患者认为使用腕式血压计很容易(p < 0.05)。14%的患者认为使用臂式血压计进行血压自我测量有约束感,7%的患者认为使用腕式血压计有约束感(p < 0.01)。两种血压计的可行性都较好,86%使用臂式血压计的患者和85%使用腕式血压计的患者没有缺失任何测量值。缺失值在第四天出现的占56%。

结论

尽管使用了两种经验证的血压计,但与臂式血压计相比,使用腕式血压计记录家庭血压时的平均收缩压显著更低。使用腕式血压计测量时手臂位置的不确定性可能解释了这些结果。在建议进行家庭血压监测时,应注意仅推荐使用经验证的设备,并优先使用臂式设备,以避免因使用不当而产生的不确定性。

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