Whitcomb B L, Prochazka A, LoVerde M, Byyny R L
Division of Internal Medicine, University Hospital, Denver, USA.
Arch Fam Med. 1995 May;4(5):419-24. doi: 10.1001/archfami.4.5.419.
To evaluate the Vita-Stat automated blood pressure computer (a patient-operated blood pressure measuring device available in the community) to determine its value as an instrument to monitor blood pressure in the ambulatory patient.
Comparative study using the Vita-Stat vs a gold standard, the mercury sphygmomanometer.
Three local grocery stores.
Sixty-three passersby who agreed to answer questions and to sit for several measurements of blood pressure.
Simultaneous measurement of blood pressure with each subject wearing a Vita-Stat cuff on the left arm and a mercury sphygmomanometer cuff on the right arm. Two pressures were measured sequentially in the same manner.
The reproducibility, accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity of the Vita-Stat computer compared with the gold standard.
In sequential measurements, the Vita-Stat readings of both systolic and diastolic blood pressure correlated less well with each other than did the mercury readings (intramachine differences). The Vita-Stat readings also correlated poorly with the mercury readings of systolic and diastolic blood pressure (intermachine differences). The variability in readings recorded by the Vita-Stat were striking, with differences of up to 60 mm Hg from the mercury readings. More than half (63.2%) of the subjects had Vita-Stat readings that were more than 5 mm Hg different from the mercury readings. Vita-Stat systolic readings were usually lower than mercury readings and also varied by as much as 60 mm Hg below in one patient to 58 mm Hg above the mercury reading in another. The sensitivity of the Vita-Stat in correctly diagnosing hypertension was 0.26; the negative predictive value was 0.45.
Our data suggest that the Vita-Stat is not only inconsistent but inaccurate in measuring blood pressure in the ambulatory patient and is, therefore, not appropriate to use as a monitoring device.
评估Vita-Stat自动血压计(一种社区中可供患者自行操作的血压测量设备),以确定其作为监测门诊患者血压工具的价值。
采用Vita-Stat与金标准汞柱式血压计进行对比研究。
当地三家杂货店。
63名路人,他们同意回答问题并接受多次血压测量。
每位受试者左臂佩戴Vita-Stat袖带,右臂佩戴汞柱式血压计袖带,同时测量血压。以相同方式依次测量两次血压。
将Vita-Stat血压计与金标准进行比较,评估其重复性、准确性、敏感性和特异性。
在连续测量中,Vita-Stat测得的收缩压和舒张压读数之间的相关性不如汞柱式血压计读数之间的相关性(仪器内差异)。Vita-Stat读数与汞柱式血压计测得的收缩压和舒张压读数之间的相关性也很差(仪器间差异)。Vita-Stat记录的读数变化显著,与汞柱式血压计读数相差高达60 mmHg。超过一半(63.2%)的受试者Vita-Stat读数与汞柱式血压计读数相差超过5 mmHg。Vita-Stat收缩压读数通常低于汞柱式血压计读数,差异范围从一名患者低于汞柱式血压计读数60 mmHg到另一名患者高于汞柱式血压计读数58 mmHg。Vita-Stat正确诊断高血压的敏感性为0.26;阴性预测值为0.45。
我们的数据表明,Vita-Stat在测量门诊患者血压时不仅不一致,而且不准确,因此,不适合用作监测设备。