Rinfret Félix, Cloutier Lyne, Wistaff Robert, Birnbaum Leora M, Ng Cheong Nathalie, Laskine Mikhael, Roederer Ghislaine, Van Nguyen Paul, Bertrand Michel, Rabasa-Lhoret Remi, Dufour Robert, Lamarre-Cliche Maxime
Institut de recherches cliniques de Montréal (IRCM), Montréal, Québec, Canada; Département des sciences biomédicales, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, Canada.
Département des sciences infirmières, Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (UQTR), Trois-Rivières, Québec, Canada.
Can J Cardiol. 2017 Dec;33(12):1639-1644. doi: 10.1016/j.cjca.2017.09.011. Epub 2017 Sep 15.
Automated office blood pressure (AOBP) measuring devices are increasingly recommended as preferred blood pressure (BP) diagnostic tools, but it is unclear how they compare and how clinical environments impact their performance.
This prospective randomized factorial parallel 4-group study compared BP estimates by BpTRU (VSM MedTech, Vancouver, BC, Canada) and Omron HEM 907 (Omron Healthcare, Kyoto, Japan) devices in closed vs open areas. Patients diagnosed with hypertension were recruited during office visits. After baseline open-room AOBP measurement with the BpTRU, patients had a second BP measurement with either the BpTRU or HEM 907 in either open or closed areas. Absolute BP levels and differences between the first and second measurements were compared. Diagnostic performance was also assessed.
Two hundred fifty-eight patients were studied. Their mean age was 66.2 ± 12.0 years, and 62% were men. The mean of first AOBP estimates was 127.4/73.3 mm Hg. Analyses of subsequent measurements revealed no influence of open or closed areas on BP means and diagnostic performance. Conversely, the Omron HEM 907 exceeded BpTRU systolic BP measurements by 4.6 mm Hg (< 0.01) in closed areas and by 3.9 mm Hg (< 0.01) in open areas. The discrepancy between devices was amplified at lower BP levels.
Although different areas did not influence BP estimates, the Omron HEM 907 significantly exceeded BpTRU measurements on average and especially at lower BP levels. These differences should be considered when interchanging devices and could have clinical decision impacts in a population of patients treated for hypertension. Our results support the constant use of only 1 device type in a given clinic.
自动诊室血压(AOBP)测量设备越来越多地被推荐为首选的血压(BP)诊断工具,但目前尚不清楚它们之间的比较情况以及临床环境如何影响其性能。
这项前瞻性随机析因平行4组研究比较了BpTRU(VSM MedTech,加拿大不列颠哥伦比亚省温哥华)和欧姆龙HEM 907(欧姆龙医疗保健公司,日本京都)设备在封闭区域与开放区域的血压估计值。在门诊就诊期间招募被诊断为高血压的患者。在使用BpTRU进行基线开放诊室AOBP测量后,患者在开放或封闭区域使用BpTRU或HEM 907进行第二次血压测量。比较了绝对血压水平以及第一次和第二次测量之间的差异。还评估了诊断性能。
共研究了258名患者。他们的平均年龄为66.2±12.0岁,62%为男性。首次AOBP估计值的平均值为127.4/73.3 mmHg。对后续测量的分析表明,开放或封闭区域对血压平均值和诊断性能没有影响。相反,在封闭区域,欧姆龙HEM 907的收缩压测量值比BpTRU高4.6 mmHg(<0.01),在开放区域高3.9 mmHg(<0.01)。在较低血压水平时,两种设备之间的差异会放大。
虽然不同区域不影响血压估计,但欧姆龙HEM 907的测量值平均显著超过BpTRU,尤其是在较低血压水平时。在更换设备时应考虑这些差异,这可能会对高血压患者群体的临床决策产生影响。我们的结果支持在特定诊所持续使用单一类型的设备。