Department of Health Economics, ICMR-National Institute for Research in Tuberculosis, No. 1, Sathyamoorthy Road, Chetpet, Chennai, 600031, India.
ICMR-Regional Medical Research Centre, Port Blair, Andaman and the Nicobar Islands, India.
Sci Rep. 2022 Mar 1;12(1):3363. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-07315-z.
This study aims to systematically review the diagnostic accuracy of a digital blood pressure measurement device compared to the gold standard mercury sphygmomanometer in published studies. Searches were conducted in PubMed, Cochrane, EBSCO, EMBASE and Google Scholar host databases using the specific search strategy and filters from 1st January 2000 to 3rd April 2021. We included studies reporting data on the sensitivity or specificity of blood pressure measured by digital devices and mercury sphygmomanometer used as the reference standard. Studies conducted among children, special populations, and specific disease groups were excluded. We considered published manuscripts in the English language only. The risk of bias and applicability concerns were assessed based on the author's judgment using the QUADAS2 manual measurement evaluation tool. Based on the screening, four studies were included in the final analysis. Sensitivity, specificity, diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), and 95% confidence interval were estimated. The digital blood pressure monitoring has a moderate level of accuracy and the device can correctly distinguish hypertension with a pooled estimate sensitivity of 65.7% and specificity of 95.9%. After removing one study, which had very low sensitivity and very high specificity, the pooled sensitivity estimate was 79%, and the specificity was 91%. The meta-analysis of DOR suggests that the digital blood pressure monitor had moderate accuracy with a mercury sphygmomanometer. This will provide the clinician and patients with accurate information on blood pressure with which diagnostic and treatment decisions could be made.
本研究旨在系统地回顾比较数字血压测量设备与金标准水银血压计在已发表研究中的诊断准确性。从 2000 年 1 月 1 日至 2021 年 4 月 3 日，我们在 PubMed、Cochrane、EBSCO、EMBASE 和 Google Scholar 主机数据库中使用特定的搜索策略和筛选器进行了搜索。我们纳入了报告数字设备测量血压的敏感性或特异性以及作为参考标准的水银血压计数据的研究。排除了针对儿童、特殊人群和特定疾病群体的研究。我们仅考虑了以英文发表的研究。基于作者使用 QUADAS2 手动测量评估工具的判断，评估了偏倚风险和适用性问题。根据筛选结果，最终有四项研究纳入了最终分析。估计了敏感性、特异性、诊断比值比（DOR）和 95%置信区间。数字血压监测具有中等准确性，该设备可以正确区分高血压，总体估计敏感性为 65.7%，特异性为 95.9%。在排除一项敏感性非常低且特异性非常高的研究后，总体敏感性估计值为 79%，特异性为 91%。DOR 的荟萃分析表明，数字血压监测器与水银血压计具有中等准确性。这将为临床医生和患者提供有关血压的准确信息，从而可以做出诊断和治疗决策。
