Brown M A, Robinson A, Buddle M L
Department of Renal Medicine, St George Hospital and University of New South Wales, Kogarah.
Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 1998 Aug;38(3):262-5. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.1998.tb03062.x.
Automated blood pressure recorders are used with increasing frequency by pregnant women, mostly without proper evaluation of their accuracy. We compared blood pressures (BP) recorded by 2 automated noninvasive devices, the Spacelabs 90207 ambulatory blood pressure monitor and the OMRON HEM 705 CP portable self-initiated device, with blood pressures recorded by routine sphygmomanometry in 79 pregnant women either considered 'at risk' for preeclampsia or with mild hypertension in pregnancy. The Spacelabs device tended to overestimate systolic BP by a mean 11 (SD=8) mmHg and diastolic BP by 5 (SD=7) mmHg for phase 5 pressure (p<0.001) but was similar to routine BPs for diastolic phase 4 pressures. The OMRON device tended to underestimate diastolic (phase 4) pressure by 4 (SD=6) mmHg (p<0.001) but gave similar systolic and diastolic (phase 5) pressures to routine sphygmomanometry. However, for both devices there was considerable individual patient variability in accuracy. When using these devices to record a limited number of blood pressure recordings, as in this study, we suggest that individual comparison with mercury sphygmomanometry be made in each pregnant woman before accepting the validity of these recordings.
孕妇越来越频繁地使用自动血压记录仪,但大多数情况下并未对其准确性进行适当评估。我们比较了79名被认为有先兆子痫“风险”或患有妊娠轻度高血压的孕妇使用两种自动无创设备(太空实验室90207动态血压监测仪和欧姆龙HEM 705 CP便携式自启动设备)记录的血压与常规血压计记录的血压。对于第5阶段的血压,太空实验室设备倾向于高估收缩压平均11(标准差 = 8)mmHg,舒张压高估5(标准差 = 7)mmHg(p<0.001),但对于第4阶段的舒张压与常规血压相似。欧姆龙设备倾向于低估第4阶段的舒张压4(标准差 = 6)mmHg(p<0.001),但在收缩压和第5阶段的舒张压方面与常规血压计测量结果相似。然而,两种设备在准确性方面都存在相当大的个体差异。在本研究中,当使用这些设备记录有限数量的血压读数时,我们建议在接受这些读数的有效性之前,对每位孕妇进行与水银血压计的个体比较。