Significantly Reduced Blood Pressure Measurement Variability for Both Normotensive and Hypertensive Subjects: Effect of Polynomial Curve Fitting of Oscillometric Pulses.

This study aimed to compare within-subject blood pressure (BP) variabilities from different measurement techniques. Cuff pressures from three repeated BP measurements were obtained from 30 normotensive and 30 hypertensive subjects. Automatic BPs were determined from the pulses with normalised peak a...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:BioMed Research International Vol. 2017; pp. 1 - 9
Autores principales: Yang, Fangwei, Chen, Fei, Zhu, Mingping, Chen, Aiqing, Zheng, Dingchang
Formato: research tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Wiley-Blackwell 7/12/2017
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:This study aimed to compare within-subject blood pressure (BP) variabilities from different measurement techniques. Cuff pressures from three repeated BP measurements were obtained from 30 normotensive and 30 hypertensive subjects. Automatic BPs were determined from the pulses with normalised peak amplitude larger than a threshold (0.5 for SBP, 0.7 for DBP, and 1.0 for MAP). They were also determined from cuff pressures associated with the above thresholds on a fitted curve polynomial curve of the oscillometric pulse peaks. Finally, the standard deviation (SD) of three repeats and its coefficient of variability (CV) were compared between the two automatic techniques. For the normotensive group, polynomial curve fitting significantly reduced SD of repeats from 3.6 to 2.5 mmHg for SBP and from 3.7 to 2.1 mmHg for MAP and reduced CV from 3.0% to 2.2% for SBP and from 4.3% to 2.4% for MAP (all P<0.01). For the hypertensive group, SD of repeats decreased from 6.5 to 5.5 mmHg for SBP and from 6.7 to 4.2 mmHg for MAP, and CV decreased from 4.2% to 3.6% for SBP and from 5.8% to 3.8% for MAP (all P<0.05). In conclusion, polynomial curve fitting of oscillometric pulses had the ability to reduce automatic BP measurement variability.