Cited by 23Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesNon-Invasive Vital Sign MonitoringHemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Validation protocols for blood pressure measuring devices: the impact of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol and the development of a Universal Standard

Abstract

In the last three decades protocols for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices have been developed by the US Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, the British Hypertension Society, the German Hypertension League, the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on blood pressure Monitoring and the International Organization for Standardization. The European Society of Hypertension International Protocol required much smaller sample size than the other protocols, aiming to reduce the time, resources and cost of validation studies and thereby increase the number of validated devices. Given its specifications, the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol was adequate for 'high- and low-accuracy' devices, yet assessment of 'moderate accuracy' devices had high uncertainty with resultant high rate of device failure. Thus, devices validated using the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol should be considered to be as accurate as those validated with the previous Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation or British Hypertension Society protocols. However, the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol did not allow subgroup evaluation (arm sizes, special populations, etc). The mission of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol to promote the concept of validation has been well achieved, as almost double studies have been published using it than all the other protocols together. However, the maintenance of different validation protocols is confusing and therefore experts from the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, European Society of Hypertension International Protocol and International Organization for Standardization have now developed the AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018) as the recommended 21st-century procedure for worldwide application. The European Society of Hypertension Working Group has published a practical guide for using the Universal Standard. It is in the interests of all scientific bodies to propagate the Universal Standard and ensure its wide implementation.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1097/mbp.0000000000000391

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. O’Brien, 2002, Working group on blood pressure monitoring of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults., Blood Press Monit, 7, 3, 10.1097/00126097-200202000-00002 · DOI
  2. O’Brien, 2010, European society of Hypertension International Protocol revision 2010 for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults., Blood Press Monit, 15, 23, 10.1097/MBP.0b013e3283360e98 · DOI
  3. Stergiou, 2018, Improving the accuracy of blood pressure measurement: the influence of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol (ESH-IP) for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices and future perspectives., J Hypertens, 36, 479, 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001635 · DOI
  4. Stergiou, 2018, A universal standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) collaboration statement., Hypertension, 71, 368, 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.117.10237 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
O’Brien, E., Stergiou, G., Palatini, P., Asmar, R., Ioannidis, J. P., Kollias, A., Lacy, P., McManus, R. J., Myers, M. G., Shennan, A., Wang, J., & Parati, G.
Affiliations
  • University College Dublin (IE)
  • National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (GR)
  • University of Padua (IT)
  • Stanford Medicine (US)
  • National Institute for Health and Care Research (GB)
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • Sunnybrook Health Science Centre (CA)
  • King's College London (GB)
  • IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano (IT)
Venue
Blood Pressure Monitoring
Published
2019-08
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
163-166
ISSN
1359-5237 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2946475827
Cited by
23
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.01
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Blood Pressure Monitoring (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • BOA (University of Milano-Bicocca) (submittedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR200201, NIHR-RP-02-12-015, RP-PG-1209-10051)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
Keywords
blood pressure measuring devices, ISO 81060-2:2018, measurement accuracy, sample size, hypertension monitoring, device failure
MeSH terms
Blood Pressure, Blood Pressure Determination, Humans, Hypertension, Societies, Medical, Blood Pressure Monitors, Practice Guidelines as Topic

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review