Hasan M A, Thomas T A, Prys-Roberts C
Sir Humphry Davy Department of Anaesthesia, University of Bristol, Bristol Royal Infirmary.
Br J Anaesth. 1993 Feb;70(2):141-4. doi: 10.1093/bja/70.2.141.
We have compared two non-invasive methods of arterial pressure (AP) measurement used in labour wards: an automatic oscillometric measurement obtained by Dinamap 1846, and a conventional auscultatory measurement obtained by midwives. A total of 369 AP measurements were recorded, involving 28 normotensive and hypertensive pregnant women during labour, with or without extradural analgesia. Compared with the midwife group, the Dinamap group had a greater systolic AP, by 2.7 mm Hg (P < 0.01) and smaller diastolic AP, by 9.8 mm Hg (P < 0.01). The correlations between the two methods were highly significant, but the limits of agreement were relatively wide for both systolic and diastolic AP measurements. We conclude that a clinically important difference exists in diastolic AP measurements. Dinamap diastolic AP must be corrected using a regression equation, or simply by adding 10 mm Hg, before being compared with the available normal and hypertensive AP values.
我们比较了产房使用的两种无创动脉压(AP)测量方法:通过Dinamap 1846获得的自动示波测量法,以及助产士进行的传统听诊测量法。共记录了369次AP测量值,涉及28名分娩期血压正常和高血压的孕妇,有无硬膜外镇痛。与助产士组相比,Dinamap组的收缩压AP更高,高2.7 mmHg(P<0.01),舒张压AP更低,低9.8 mmHg(P<0.01)。两种方法之间的相关性非常显著,但收缩压和舒张压AP测量的一致性界限相对较宽。我们得出结论,舒张压AP测量存在临床上的重要差异。在将Dinamap舒张压AP与现有的正常和高血压AP值进行比较之前,必须使用回归方程进行校正,或简单地加上10 mmHg。