Comparison between blood pressure readings using a mercury versus an aneroid sphygmomanometer

Abstract

Objective For more than a century since its introduction, mercury sphygmomanometer (HgS) had been the mainstay for office measurement of blood pressure (BP). In light of the environmental and health hazards associated with mercury, there is a need to replace it with mercury-free alternatives all over the world. We aimed to validate the widely used aneroid sphygmomanometer (AnS) by comparing its BP readings against BP readings taken with an HgS. Methods We compared the BP readings using AnS vs. HgS on a sample of 300 patients of 18 years or older age admitted to a tertiary care hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Results The differences between mean HgS and AnS BP readings were found to be statistically significant (P-value <0.01). The mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) readings of the two devices were still significantly correlated (r = 0.989; P < 0.01). Similarly, the mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) readings were also significantly correlated (r = 0.988; P < 0.01). The aneroid device identified a higher proportion of hypertensive participants compared to the mercury device. Conclusion The difference in the two devices used was found to be significant; however, the readings were correlated with each other. The AnS significantly overestimated BP readings, thereby identifying a higher proportion of hypertensives as compared to the HgS. There is a considerable room for improvement in the accuracy of the AnS, only then an accurate and a well-calibrated AnS could provide an acceptable alternative to the use of the HgS.

Comparability of childhood blood pressure measurements with two different devices

“…Rinfret et al (2017) showed an average systolic blood pressure difference of 4.3 mmHg between two devices, also investigated in adults (Rinfret et al, 2017). Both studies with statistically significant differences demonstrated higher correlations, up to r = 0.989 and r = 0.919, between devices compared to our study (Farhan et al, 2020; Rinfret et al, 2017). One reason why the correlation coefficient is lower in our study compared to previously reported results in adults might be the age of the investigated populations and the fact that measurements took place in the school setting.…”

“…Blood pressure, MAP and HR in school children did not differ between both devices. In the literature, other comparisons of blood pressure devices showed significant differences (Farhan et al, 2020;Rinfret et al, 2017). Farhan et al (2020) reported mean differences between two devices of 2.8 mmHg systolic and 2.4 mmHg diastolic blood pressure in adults (Farhan et al, 2020).…”

“…In the literature, other comparisons of blood pressure devices showed significant differences (Farhan et al, 2020;Rinfret et al, 2017). Farhan et al (2020) reported mean differences between two devices of 2.8 mmHg systolic and 2.4 mmHg diastolic blood pressure in adults (Farhan et al, 2020). Rinfret et al (2017) showed an average systolic blood pressure difference of 4.3 mmHg between two devices, also investigated in adults (Rinfret et al, 2017).…”