Suppr超能文献

一项关于手动和自动血压读数变异性和可靠性的系统评价。

A systematic review of variability and reliability of manual and automated blood pressure readings.

机构信息

Faculty of Health, University of Plymouth, Taunton TA1 5YD, Somerset, UK.

出版信息

J Clin Nurs. 2011 Mar;20(5-6):602-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2702.2010.03528.x.

Abstract

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

To compare the accuracy and appropriateness of auscultatory (manual) and oscillometric (automated) devices for measuring blood pressure in clinical settings.

BACKGROUND

Accurate measurement of blood pressure is integral to early recognition of deterioration in the condition of a patient. Despite recommendations regarding the use of auscultatory devices in situations where treatment decisions are made dependent on blood readings, the use of automated machines is becoming common practice.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

METHODS

A search of the Medline, CINAHLPlus and The Cochrane Library databases was undertaken for papers published in English between January 1997-May 2009. Sixteen studies were identified that fulfilled the inclusion criteria. After quality assessment, all were included in the review. Results are presented in tabular and narrative form.

RESULTS

In 10 of the studies reviewed, the authors came to the conclusion that oscillometric devices were less accurate than auscultatory devices. However, in most cases the oscillometric device appears sufficiently accurate for clinical use, the exceptions being use with hypertensive patients, patients with arrhythmia and after trauma. Only two studies assessed the comparative accuracy of aneroid devices, and these indicated that they were more accurate than oscillometric devices, but the differences were not clinically important.

CONCLUSIONS

There are situations where the substitution of oscillometric for auscultatory devices could have particularly serious repercussions for the patient, such as when the patient is either hypertensive or hypotensive. However, further research is required on the use of aneroid sphygmomanometers as a replacement for mercury devices.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

Practitioners should be made aware of the need to use auscultatory devices in specific circumstances, such as in management of hypertension, after the patient has experienced trauma or where there is significant potential for deterioration in the patient's condition.

摘要

目的

比较听诊(手动)和振荡(自动)设备在临床环境中测量血压的准确性和适宜性。

背景

准确测量血压是早期发现患者病情恶化的关键。尽管有建议指出,在依赖血压读数做出治疗决策的情况下应使用听诊设备,但自动机器的使用正变得越来越普遍。

设计

系统评价。

方法

对 1997 年 1 月至 2009 年 5 月期间发表的英文文献,在 Medline、CINAHLPlus 和 The Cochrane Library 数据库中进行了搜索。确定了 16 项符合纳入标准的研究。经过质量评估,所有研究均纳入综述。结果以表格和叙述形式呈现。

结果

在 10 项综述研究中,作者得出结论,振荡设备的准确性不如听诊设备。然而,在大多数情况下,振荡设备的准确性足以满足临床使用,例外情况是用于高血压患者、心律失常患者和创伤后患者。只有两项研究评估了无液气压计的比较准确性,结果表明它们比振荡设备更准确,但差异无临床意义。

结论

在某些情况下,用振荡设备替代听诊设备可能会对患者产生特别严重的影响,例如患者高血压或低血压时。然而,需要进一步研究无液气压计作为水银设备替代品的使用。

临床相关性

临床医生应该意识到,在特定情况下需要使用听诊设备,例如在高血压管理中、患者经历创伤后或患者病情有明显恶化的潜在风险时。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验