Bunting Leonard, Butki Andrew, Sullivan Ashley
St. John Hospital and Medical Center, Department of Emergency Medicine, Detroit, Michigan.
West J Emerg Med. 2017 Apr;18(3):502-508. doi: 10.5811/westjem.2016.12.32344. Epub 2017 Feb 27.
We proposed using compression sonography to observe the coaptation and collapse of the radial artery as a surrogate for automated cuff blood pressures (BP). We hypothesize that the pressure required to achieve coaptation and complete collapse of the artery would correlate to the diastolic and systolic BP, respectively. This pilot study was to assess the feasibility of ultrasound-guided radial artery compression (URAC) for BP measurement and compare patient comfort levels during automated cuff with URAC measurements.
This was a prospective cohort pilot study with a convenience sampling of 25 adult patients at a single urban emergency department. URAC pressure was measured, followed by cuff manometry on the same arm. A 100mL normal saline bag was connected to the Stryker pressure monitor and placed on the volar wrist. Pressure was applied to the bag with a linear transducer and the radial artery was observed for coaptation of the anterior and posterior walls and complete collapse. Pressures required for coaptation and collapse were recorded from the Stryker display. Patient level of comfort was also documented during the URAC method, with patients reporting either "more," "same" or "less" comfort in comparison to automated cuffs. We analyzed data using intraclass correlation and paired t-tests. Interrater reliability was calculated using intraclass correlation.
The mean cuff systolic BP was 138.6 ± 22.1 mmHg compared to 126.9 ± 19.8 mmHg for the URAC systolic BP (p=0.02). For diastolic BP, there was no significant difference between the cuff BP and the URAC BP (83.7 ± 13.0 cuff vs. 86.5 ± 19.8 URAC, p=0.46). The intraclass correlation (ICC) for systolic BP was 0.48 (p=0.04) and 0.57 (p=0.02) for diastolic BP. The agreement between the two observers was 0.88 for identifying coaptation on ultrasound (diastolic pressure) and was 0.92 for identifying collapse (systolic pressure). Eighty percent (20/25) of subjects found the URAC method more comfortable than the cuff measurement, and the remainder found it the same (5/20).
This pilot study showed statistically significant moderate correlation between automated cuff diastolic BP and URAC measurements for vessel coaptation. Additionally, most patients found the URAC method more comfortable than traditional cuff measurements. Compression ultrasonography shows promise as an alternative method of BP measurement, though future studies are needed.
我们提议使用压迫超声检查来观察桡动脉的贴合与塌陷情况,以此作为自动袖带血压测量的替代方法。我们假设实现动脉贴合与完全塌陷所需的压力分别与舒张压和收缩压相关。这项初步研究旨在评估超声引导下桡动脉压迫(URAC)用于血压测量的可行性,并比较自动袖带测量与URAC测量期间患者的舒适度。
这是一项前瞻性队列初步研究,在一个城市急诊科对25名成年患者进行便利抽样。测量URAC压力,随后在同一手臂上进行袖带测压。将一个100mL的生理盐水袋连接到史赛克压力监测仪上,并放置在掌侧手腕处。使用线性换能器对袋子施加压力,观察桡动脉前后壁的贴合情况和完全塌陷情况。从史赛克显示屏上记录贴合和塌陷所需的压力。在URAC测量过程中还记录了患者的舒适度,患者报告与自动袖带相比舒适度为“更高”、“相同”或“更低”。我们使用组内相关系数和配对t检验分析数据。使用组内相关系数计算评分者间信度。
袖带平均收缩压为138.6±22.1mmHg,而URAC收缩压为126.9±19.8mmHg(p=0.02)。对于舒张压,袖带血压与URAC血压之间无显著差异(袖带83.7±13.0,URAC 86.5±19.8,p=0.46)。收缩压的组内相关系数(ICC)为0.48(p=0.04),舒张压为0.57(p=0.02)。两位观察者在超声识别贴合(舒张压)方面的一致性为0.88,在识别塌陷(收缩压)方面为0.92。80%(20/25)的受试者认为URAC方法比袖带测量更舒适,其余受试者认为两者相同(5/25)。
这项初步研究表明,自动袖带舒张压与URAC测量血管贴合度之间存在统计学上显著的中度相关性。此外,大多数患者认为URAC方法比传统袖带测量更舒适。压迫超声检查显示出作为一种替代血压测量方法的前景,不过还需要进一步的研究。