The George Institute for Global Health, Hyderabad, India (S.M.).
The George Institute for Global Health, New Delhi, India (E.R., R.J., K.S., P.K., R.R., A.D., V.A.I., A.G.J.).
Hypertension. 2023 May;80(5):1110-1116. doi: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.122.20425. Epub 2023 Mar 13.
To identify and summarize the global research literature on validation of automated noninvasive blood pressure measurement devices (BPMDs) with upper arm cuff, develop a repository of validated BPMDs in compliance with the 2020 World Health Organization technical specifications, and identify challenges and gaps in evidence base on validated BPMDs.
A scoping review was conducted. Primary research validating BPMDs complying with the 2020 World Health Organization technical specifications (ie, semiautomated/automated noninvasive devices with upper arm cuff), published in English between January 2000 and December 2021, was included. We searched MEDLINE, Web of Science, Scopus, EMBASE, CINAHL, CENTRAL, ProQuest and the dabl website.
We included 269 studies validating 251 BPMDs across 89 manufacturers. Omron (29%), Microlife (10%), and A&D Company (8%) were the top 3 manufacturers. The 3 most frequently used validation protocols were the European Society of Hypertension-international protocol 2002 (27%), European Society of Hypertension-international protocol 2010 (25%), and modified British Hypertension Society protocol 1993 (16%), respectively. Nearly 45% of the validated BPMDs were intended for use in clinical settings, 38% were for home or self-measurement use, and 48% were for general adults. Most studies reported that BPMDs passed the validation criteria. There was inadequate reporting across studies, especially pertaining to validation settings.
Most BPMDs fulfilled the validation criteria. However, there are considerable gaps in BPMD research in terms of geographical representation, including specific target populations and diseases/conditions, and a range of arm circumferences. Additionally, a potential strategy is required to accelerate the adoption of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI)/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard (International Organization for Standardization 81060-2:2018) for BPMD validation.
为了识别和总结全球关于验证带臂带的自动无创血压测量设备(BPMD)的研究文献,建立一个符合 2020 年世界卫生组织技术规范的经过验证的 BPMD 存储库,并确定经过验证的 BPMD 证据基础中的挑战和差距。
进行了范围界定审查。纳入了 2000 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间以英文发表的、符合 2020 年世界卫生组织技术规范(即带臂带的半自动/自动无创设备)的验证 BPMD 的原始研究。我们检索了 MEDLINE、Web of Science、Scopus、EMBASE、CINAHL、CENTRAL、ProQuest 和 dabl 网站。
我们纳入了 269 项验证了 89 家制造商的 251 种 BPMD 的研究。欧姆龙(29%)、美迪克(10%)和爱安德(8%)是前 3 大制造商。使用最频繁的 3 种验证方案分别是欧洲高血压学会 2002 年国际方案(27%)、欧洲高血压学会 2010 年国际方案(25%)和改良英国高血压学会 1993 年方案(16%)。近 45%的经过验证的 BPMD 旨在用于临床环境,38%用于家庭或自我测量,48%用于一般成年人。大多数研究报告称 BPMD 通过了验证标准。但是,各研究之间的报告不充分,尤其是在验证环境方面。
大多数 BPMD 都符合验证标准。然而,在 BPMD 研究方面,在地理代表性方面存在相当大的差距,包括特定的目标人群和疾病/病症以及一系列的臂围。此外,需要制定一项策略来加速采用医疗器械促进协会(AAMI)/欧洲高血压学会/国际标准化组织通用标准(国际标准化组织 81060-2:2018)对 BPMD 的验证。