Jenner D A, Beilin L J, Vandongen R, DeKlerk N H
Department of Medicine, University of Western Australia, Perth.
Clin Exp Hypertens A. 1988;10(4):575-88. doi: 10.3109/10641968809033910.
Blood pressure measurements obtained with the Dinamap 845XT Vital Signs monitor were compared with measurements obtained with a standard mercury sphygmomanometer and a London School of Hygiene mercury sphygmomanometer in a group of 31 normotensive and hypertensive subjects. The experimental design allowed reading to be taken with all 3 devices at approximately the same time. 12 sets of readings were obtained with each device in each subject. Although inter-device differences estimated from analysis of variance were small (less than 2 mmHg after allowing for calibration differences) differences between measurements taken simultaneously with the 3 devices were often substantial. Agreement between the two mercury sphygmomanometers was better than that between either sphygmomanometer and the Dinamap. This may be a reflection of fundamental differences between auscultatory and oscillometric measurements. Differences between devices were unrelated to blood pressure level. The observed variability within subjects was similar with each device.
在31名血压正常和高血压受试者组成的群体中,将使用Dinamap 845XT生命体征监测仪获得的血压测量值与使用标准汞柱血压计和伦敦卫生学院汞柱血压计获得的测量值进行比较。实验设计允许在大致相同的时间使用所有三种设备进行读数。每个受试者使用每种设备获得12组读数。尽管从方差分析估计的设备间差异较小(在校准差异后小于2 mmHg),但同时使用这三种设备进行的测量之间的差异通常很大。两种汞柱血压计之间的一致性优于任何一种血压计与Dinamap之间的一致性。这可能反映了听诊法和示波法测量之间的根本差异。设备之间的差异与血压水平无关。每个设备观察到的受试者内部变异性相似。