Accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure monitoring in pregnancy and pre‐eclampsia
Abstract
Objective To assess the accuracy of the Omron HEM 705 CP oscillometric device for the measurement of blood pressure in pregnancy and pre‐eclampsia. Setting Two teaching hospitals. Participants Eighty‐five pregnant women with a wide range of blood pressures, and 43 women with pre‐eclampsia. Methods Evaluation was carried out according to the British Hypertension Society protocol, incorporating criteria of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI). Results Mean differences (device minus observer) for systolic blood pressure were −0.9 mmHg (SD 10) in normal pregnancy, and −2 mmHg (SD 10) in the women with pre‐eclampsia. For diastolic blood pressure, Korotkoff phase V, the differences were −1.5 mmHg (SD 10), and −8 mmHg (SD 8) respectively; i.e. the device consistently under‐read the diastolic blood pressure in pre‐eclamptic women by a mean of 8 mmHg when compared with conventional sphygmomanometry. Korotkoff phase IV could not be accurately reproduced. According to the British Hypertension Society grading criteria, the device reached a ‘B’ grading in the 85 pregnant women. In pre‐eclampsia only a ‘C’ grade was reached for systolic blood pressure, and ‘D’ grade for diastolic blood pressure. Accuracy criteria stipulated by the AAMI were not met in any situation. Conclusion The Omron HEM 705 CP does not reach acceptable accuracy criteria for blood pressure measurement when compared with trained observers in women with pre‐eclampsia, as judged by the British Hypertension Society Protocol. It also failed to meet the AAMI criteria, although the methodology stipulated by the AAMI may not be applicable to a pregnancy population.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Lists of electronic BP monitors successfully validated in children are available at www.stridebp.org.
“Lists of electronic BP monitors successfully validated in children are available at www.stridebp.org[91]”
Very few oscillometric home BP monitors have been tested in children.
“Unfortunately, very few oscillometric home BP monitors have been tested in children [91,182]”
Lists of BP monitors successfully validated in pregnancy including preeclampsia are available at www.stridebp.org.
“Lists of BP monitors, which have been successfully validated in pregnancy including preeclampsia are available at www.stridebp.org[91]”
An automated oscillometric device successfully validated in adults may not be accurate in children.
“An automated oscillometric device, which has been successfully validated in adults may not be accurate in children [90,91,182]”
Cites
STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT
Martin Bland, J., & Altman, D. (1986) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(86)90837-8 · Cited by 47,965 · see citing works
Flagged first, then by citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Parati, G., Stergiou, G. S., Asmar, R., Bilo, G., de Leeuw, P., Imai, Y., Kario, K., Lurbe, E., Manolis, A., Mengden, T., et al. (2008) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0b013e328308da66 · Cited by 837 · see citing works
Self-citationCarroli, G., Rooney, C., & Villar, J. (2001) · Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology · doi:10.1046/j.1365-3016.2001.0150s1001.x · Cited by 622 · see citing works
<scp>SOMANZ</scp>guidelines for the management of hypertensive disorders of pregnancy 2014
Lowe, S. A., Bowyer, L., Lust, K., McMahon, L. P., Morton, M., North, R. A., Paech, M., & Said, J. M. (2015) · Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology · doi:10.1111/ajo.12399 · Cited by 299 · see citing works
Parati, G., Stergiou, G. S., Bilo, G., Kollias, A., Pengo, M., Ochoa, J. E., Agarwal, R., Asayama, K., Asmar, R., Burnier, M., et al. (2021) · Journal of Hypertension · doi:10.1097/hjh.0000000000002922 · Cited by 178 · see citing works
Self-citationNathan, H. L., Seed, P. T., Hezelgrave, N. L., De Greeff, A., Lawley, E., Anthony, J., Hall, D. R., Steyn, W., Chappell, L. C., & Shennan, A. H. (2018) · Pregnancy Hypertension · doi:10.1016/j.preghy.2017.11.003 · Cited by 40 · see citing works
“This is important because the majority of commercially available automated BP devices have not been validated for use in pregnancy including pre-eclampsia and consistently underestimate BP in women with pre-eclampsia [20].”
BackgroundSelf-citation
- Authors
- Gupta, M., Shennan, A. H., Halligan, A., Taylor, D. J., & de Swiet, M.
- Affiliations
- Queen Charlotte's and Chelsea Hospital (GB)
- University of Leicester (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Shennan, Andrew H.
- Venue
- BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 1997-03
- Volume
- 104
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 350-355
- ISSN
- 0306-5456 (ISSN-L)
- 1470-0328
- 1471-0528
- OpenAlex
- W2019386856
- Cited by
- 68
- References
- 1
- Citations by year
- 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 4.43
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- BJOG An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Obstetrics and Gynecology › Pregnancy and preeclampsia studies
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
- Keywords
- oscillometric blood pressure measurement, preeclampsia, pregnancy, blood pressure measurement, British Hypertension Society protocol
- MeSH terms
- Blood Pressure, Female, Humans, Pre-Eclampsia, Pregnancy, Sensitivity and Specificity, Observer Variation, Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory
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