Duncombe Stephanie L, Voss Christine, Harris Kevin C
Division of Cardiology, Department of Pediatrics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada.
J Hypertens. 2017 Feb;35(2):213-224. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001178.
The phase-out of mercury from clinical settings calls for valid alternatives to assess blood pressure (BP) in children. Aneroid devices provide a mercury-free alternative to BP measurements by auscultation, whereas oscillometric (automated) devices are increasingly becoming the norm in clinical practice due to their ease of use. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to investigate the accuracy of oscillometric and aneroid BP devices compared with the mercury sphygmomanometer for the measurement of BP in children.
We systematically searched four electronic databases (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and Web of Science) and relevant journals for eligible articles published before 30 July 2015. We screened 1415 articles, and two authors independently reviewed 92 full-text articles.
We included 29 articles (38 studies) with 26 879 children. Random-effects model meta-analyses revealed that oscillometric devices yield higher measurements of SBP than auscultation with a mercury sphygmomanometer (pooled effect estimate 2.53 mmHg; 95% CI 0.57-4.50; P < 0.05); the pooled effect estimate for SBP was smaller in studies that 'passed' validation protocols (1.76 mmHg; 95% CI 0.61-2.81; n = 12). There was no significant difference for DBP (pooled effect estimate 1.55 mmHg; 95% CI -0.20 to 3.31). There was heterogeneity between studies, explained in part by differences in manufacturer, study setting and observer training. Only three studies compared BP using aneroid and mercury devices and found comparable results.
Oscillometric devices may serve as a suitable alternative to auscultation for initial BP screening in the pediatric population.
临床环境中逐步淘汰汞需要有效的替代方法来评估儿童血压(BP)。无液血压计为通过听诊测量血压提供了一种无汞替代方法,而示波法(自动)设备因其使用方便在临床实践中越来越成为常态。本系统评价和荟萃分析的目的是研究与汞柱式血压计相比,示波法和无液血压计在测量儿童血压时的准确性。
我们系统检索了四个电子数据库(MEDLINE、Embase、CINAHL和科学网)以及相关期刊,以查找2015年7月30日前发表的符合条件的文章。我们筛选了1415篇文章,两位作者独立评审了92篇全文文章。
我们纳入了29篇文章(38项研究),涉及26879名儿童。随机效应模型荟萃分析显示,示波法设备测量的收缩压高于汞柱式血压计听诊测量结果(合并效应估计值为2.53 mmHg;95%CI为0.57 - 4.50;P < 0.05);在“通过”验证方案的研究中,收缩压的合并效应估计值较小(1.76 mmHg;95%CI为0.61 - 2.81;n = 12)。舒张压无显著差异(合并效应估计值为1.55 mmHg;95%CI为 - 0.20至3.31)。研究之间存在异质性,部分原因是制造商、研究环境和观察者培训的差异。只有三项研究比较了无液血压计和汞柱式血压计测量的血压,结果相当。
示波法设备可作为儿科人群初始血压筛查听诊法的合适替代方法。