Suppr超能文献

霍克斯利随机零位血压计是否会低估血压,以及低估多少?

Does the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer underestimate blood pressure, and by how much?

作者信息

Mackie A, Whincup P, McKinnon M

机构信息

MRC Epidemiology and Medical Care Unit, London, UK.

出版信息

J Hum Hypertens. 1995 May;9(5):337-43.

PMID:7623370
Abstract

The study objective was to compare blood pressure (BP) measurement by the Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer and the standard mercury sphygmomanometer. Comparison of simultaneous 'blind' BP measurements were made using the Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer and the standard mercury sphygmomanometer linked by a Y-connector to a single cuff, in the general practice and office environments. Sixty five healthy volunteers and general practice patients, aged between 20 and 50 years (SBP range 82-184 mm Hg, DBP range 38-112 mm Hg), were studied. Each had three blood pressure measurements taken. Mean BPs recorded by the Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer were lower than those recorded by the standard mercury sphygmomanometer. The Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer underestimated SBP by 1.3 mm Hg (95% CI 0.9-1.8 mm Hg) and DBP by 1.7 mm Hg (95% CI 1.1-2.3 mm Hg). These differences between instruments were independent of BP level both for systolic and diastolic measurements. An overview including this study and six other published reports describing nine studies examining the performance of the Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer suggested a similar degree of underestimation for SBP (mean difference 1.35 mm Hg, 95% CI 1.24-1.46 mm Hg). Underestimation of DBP appeared greater (mean difference 2.54 mm Hg, 95% CI 2.43-2.65 mm Hg) but was reduced when two outlying studies were removed from analysis (mean 1.97, 95% CI 1.85-2.09 mm Hg). We conclude that the Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer underestimates systolic and diastolic pressure, when compared with the standard mercury sphygmomanometer. However, the degree of underestimation is small and appears consistent across a wide range of blood pressure levels.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)

摘要

该研究的目的是比较使用Hawksley随机零点血压计和标准汞柱血压计测量血压(BP)的情况。在全科医疗和办公室环境中,通过Y形连接器将Hawksley随机零点血压计和标准汞柱血压计连接到单个袖带,对同时进行的“盲法”血压测量进行比较。研究了65名年龄在20至50岁之间(收缩压范围82 - 184毫米汞柱,舒张压范围38 - 112毫米汞柱)的健康志愿者和全科医疗患者。每人进行了三次血压测量。Hawksley随机零点血压计记录的平均血压低于标准汞柱血压计记录的平均血压。Hawksley随机零点血压计低估收缩压1.3毫米汞柱(95%置信区间0.9 - 1.8毫米汞柱),低估舒张压1.7毫米汞柱(95%置信区间1.1 - 2.3毫米汞柱)。两种仪器之间的这些差异在收缩压和舒张压测量中均与血压水平无关。一项综合了本研究以及其他六篇发表报告(描述了九项检验Hawksley随机零点血压计性能的研究)的综述表明,收缩压的低估程度相似(平均差异1.35毫米汞柱,95%置信区间1.24 - 1.46毫米汞柱)。舒张压的低估似乎更大(平均差异2.54毫米汞柱,95%置信区间2.43 - 2.65毫米汞柱),但在剔除两项离群研究后进行分析时有所降低(平均1.97,95%置信区间1.85 - 2.09毫米汞柱)。我们得出结论,与标准汞柱血压计相比,Hawksley随机零点血压计低估了收缩压和舒张压。然而,低估程度较小,且在广泛的血压水平范围内似乎是一致的。(摘要截短至250字)

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验