Suppr超能文献

在静态和动态条件下,使用太空实验室90217A和Mobil-O-Graph NG设备记录肱动脉血压的比较研究。

A comparison study of brachial blood pressure recorded with Spacelabs 90217A and Mobil-O-Graph NG devices under static and ambulatory conditions.

作者信息

Sarafidis P A, Lazaridis A A, Imprialos K P, Georgianos P I, Avranas K A, Protogerou A D, Doumas M N, Athyros V G, Karagiannis A I

机构信息

Department of Nephrology, Hippokration Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.

Second Propaedeutic Department of Internal Medicine, Hippokration Hospital, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece.

出版信息

J Hum Hypertens. 2016 Dec;30(12):742-749. doi: 10.1038/jhh.2016.11. Epub 2016 Mar 3.

Abstract

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring is an important tool in hypertension diagnosis and management. Although several ambulatory devices exist, comparative studies are scarce. This study aimed to compare for the first time brachial blood pressure levels of Spacelabs 90217A and Mobil-O-Graph NG, under static and ambulatory conditions. We examined 40 healthy individuals under static (study A) and ambulatory (study B) conditions. In study A, participants were randomized into two groups that included blood pressure measurements with mercury sphygmomanometer, Spacelabs and Mobil-O-Graph devices with reverse order of recordings. In study B, simultaneous 6-h recordings with both devices were performed with participants randomized in two sequences of device positioning with arm reversal at 3 h. Finally, all the participants filled in a questionnaire rating their overall preference for a device. In study A, brachial systolic blood pressure (117.2±10.3 vs 117.1±9.8 mm Hg, P=0.943) and diastolic blood pressure (73.3±9.4 mm Hg vs 74.1±9.4 mm Hg, P=0.611) did not differ between Spacelabs and Mobil-O-Graph or vs sphygmomanometer (117.8±11.1 mm Hg, P=0.791 vs Spacelabs, P=0.753 vs Mobil-O-Graph). Similarly, no differences were found in ambulatory systolic blood pressure (117.9±11.4 vs 118.3±11.0 mm Hg, P=0.864), diastolic blood pressure (73.7±7.4 vs 74.7±8.0 mm Hg, P=0.571), mean blood pressure and heart rate between Spacelabs and Mobil-O-Graph. Correlation analyses and Bland-Altman plots showed agreement between the monitors. Overall, the participants showed a preference for the Mobil-O-Graph. Spacelabs 90217A and Mobil-O-Graph NG provide practically identical measurements during the static and ambulatory conditions in healthy individuals and can be rather used interchangeably in clinical practice.

摘要

动态血压监测是高血压诊断和管理中的一项重要工具。尽管有几种动态血压监测设备,但比较研究却很匮乏。本研究旨在首次比较Spacelabs 90217A和Mobil-O-Graph NG在静态和动态条件下的肱动脉血压水平。我们在静态(研究A)和动态(研究B)条件下检查了40名健康个体。在研究A中,参与者被随机分为两组,分别使用汞柱式血压计、Spacelabs和Mobil-O-Graph设备测量血压,记录顺序相反。在研究B中,使用这两种设备同时进行6小时记录,参与者被随机分为两组,设备放置顺序不同,且在3小时时手臂反转。最后,所有参与者填写一份问卷,对他们对设备的总体偏好进行评分。在研究A中,Spacelabs和Mobil-O-Graph之间以及与血压计相比,肱动脉收缩压(117.2±10.3 vs 117.1±9.8 mmHg,P = 0.943)和舒张压(73.3±9.4 mmHg vs 74.1±9.4 mmHg,P = 0.611)没有差异(与血压计相比,与Spacelabs相比P = 0.791,与Mobil-O-Graph相比P = 0.753)。同样,在动态收缩压(117.9±11.4 vs 118.3±11.0 mmHg,P = 0.864)、舒张压(73.7±7.4 vs 74.7±8.0 mmHg,P = 0.571)、平均血压和心率方面,Spacelabs和Mobil-O-Graph之间也没有差异。相关性分析和Bland-Altman图显示监测仪之间具有一致性。总体而言,参与者表现出对Mobil-O-Graph的偏好。Spacelabs 90217A和Mobil-O-Graph NG在健康个体的静态和动态条件下提供的测量结果几乎相同,在临床实践中可以相当互换使用。

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