Accuracy of four indirect methods of blood pressure measurement, with hemodynamic correlations

Abstract

In 38 adults undergoing cardiac surgery, 4 indirect blood pressure techniques were compared with brachial arterial blood pressure at predetermined intervals before and after cardiopulmonary bypass. Indirect blood pressure measurement techniques included automated oscillometry, manual auscultation, visual onset of oscillation (flicker) and return-to-flow methods. Hemodynamic measurements or calculations included heart rate, cardiac index, stroke volume index, and systemic vascular resistance index. Indirect and intraarterial blood pressure values were compared by simple linear regression by patient and measurement period. Measurement errors (arterial minus indirect blood pressure) were calculated, and stepwise regression assessed the relationship between measurement error and heart rate, cardiac index, stroke volume index, and systemic vascular resistance index. Indirect to intraarterial blood pressure correlation coefficients varied over time, with the strongest correlations often occurring at the first and last measurement periods (preinduction and 60 minutes after cardiopulmonary bypass), particularly for systolic blood pressure. Within-patient correlations between indirect and arterial blood pressure varied widely--they were consistently high or low in some patients. In other patients, correlations were especially weak with a particular indirect blood pressure method for systolic, mean, or diastolic blood pressure; in some cases indirect blood pressure was inadequate for clinical diagnosis of acute blood pressure changes or trends. The mean correlations between indirect and direct blood pressure values were, for systolic blood pressure: 0.69 for oscillometry, 0.77 for auscultation, 0.73 for flicker, and 0.74 for return-to-flow; for mean blood pressure: 0.70 for oscillometry and 0.73 for auscultation; and for diastolic blood pressure: 0.73 for oscillometry and 0.69 for auscultation. The mean measurement errors (arterial minus indirect values) for the individual indirect blood pressure methods were, for systolic: 0 mm Hg for oscillometry, 9 mm Hg for auscultation, -5 mm Hg for flicker, 7 mm Hg for return-to-flow; for mean: -6 mm Hg for oscillometry, and -3 mm Hg for auscultation; and for diastolic: -9 mm Hg for oscillometry and -8 mm Hg for auscultation. Mean measurement error for systolic blood pressure was thus least with automated oscillometry and greatest with manual auscultation, while standard deviations ranging from 9 to 15 mm Hg confirmed the highly variable nature of single indirect blood pressure measurements. Except for oscillometric diastolic blood pressure, a combination of systemic hemodynamics (heart rate, stroke volume index, systemic vascular resistance index, and cardiac index) correlated with each indirect blood pressure measurement error, which suggests that particular numeric ranges of these variables minimize measurement error.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Factors influencing the accuracy of oscillometric blood pressure measurement in critically ill patients

“…The overall bias of Ϫ2.4 mm Hg obtained by the new algorithm is consistent with those previously published (1,11,12,21,22). This bias was significantly lower than the bias calculated for the established algorithm.…”

“…The calibration was checked against a mercury column. The average resonance frequency of the catheter tubing-transducer system was 20 Hz (range, [16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25], combined with a damping coefficient of 0.3 . In addition, in every patient the fast-flush technique described by Gardener (15) was performed to test the adequacy of our pressure monitoring system.…”

Comparison of Automatic Oscillometric Arterial Pressure Measurement With Conventional Auscultatory Measurement in the Labour Ward

“…Many studies have correlated the accuracy and consistency of automatic oscillometric devices with indirect auscultatory measurements [1,2], and direct intra-arterial pressure measurements [3][4][5][6][7][8][9] in general adult populations [1,3,7], neonates [5,6], children [2], cardiac [4,5,9] and critically ill patients [6,8]. So far, studies on women in labour have not been published.…”

Accuracy and trending abilities of finger plethysmographic blood pressure and cardiac output compared with invasive measurements during caesarean delivery in healthy women. An observational study.

“…Judging from the graphs, the same is true when considering the first two measurements, i.e. before open chest surgery, separately [20].…”