Validation of inflationary noninvasive blood pressure monitoring in the emergency room

Abstract

ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to compare the values of a noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurement during cuff inflation (inflationary NIBP) and deflationary NIBP measurements and to verify whether inflationary NIBP is equivalent to conventional deflationary NIBP and is acceptable for clinical use in the emergency room (ER).Materials and methodsA total of 2981 NIBP data points were collected from 175 patients (age, 56.5±22.2 years; range, 7–92 years) who had been treated in the resuscitation area of the ER at Keio University Hospital. The data points were obtained using two alternate algorithms with a standard monitor (BSM-6000). One algorithm consisted of continuous inflationary and deflationary measurements in a single cycle (dual algorithm, 1502 data points); this algorithm was used to verify the success rate and the precision of the data. The second algorithm (1479 data points) consisted of only conventional deflationary measurements and was used to verify the duration of the measurement cycle.ResultsThe success rate of the inflationary NIBP (completed using only the inflationary method) was 69.0%. Failures in the inflationary measurements were caused by arrhythmia and/or body motions. The mean difference and SD of the systolic pressure and the diastolic pressure between inflationary NIBP and deflationary NIBP were −0.6±8.8 and 3.5±7.5 mmHg, respectively. The confidence intervals were −0.6 (95% confidence interval=−1.1 to −0.1) and 3.5 (95% confidence interval=3.0 to 4.0) mmHg. The coefficients of correlation were 0.96 and 0.93. Inflationary NIBP was capable of determining the NIBP more quickly compared with deflationary NIBP (average of 15.9 vs. 34.2 s; P<0.05).ConclusionInflationary NIBP measurements have a reasonable accuracy and a sufficient rapidity, compared with deflationary NIBP measurements, in ER patients.

Efficacy of a new blood pressure monitor (inflationary non‐invasive blood pressure, iNIBP™): a randomised controlled study

“…We hypothesized that, compared with the conventional NIBP monitoring device, the iNIBP would measure the blood pressure faster, particularly when the blood pressure has suddenly increased or decreased. There have been two observational studies on the use of the iNIBP [3,4], but no studies on the accuracy of the iNIBP.…”

Validation of the Mindray VS9 Vital Signs Monitor in a combined adult and pediatric population according to ISO Standard 81060-2:2018

“…For example, an ideal inflation procedure should include adjusting the speed of the air-pump to keep the pressure stable when different cuffs are used. To date, only two inflation procedures have been developed: one by Welch Allyn SureBP [ 2 ], and one by Nihon Kohden Corporation [ 6 , 7 ]. Mindray TrueBP is a novel non-invasive BP measurement algorithm based on inflation procedure.…”

Assessing the validity of a linear inflation method in noninvasive blood pressure monitoring during the induction period of general anaesthesia

“…While the study results demonstrated the utility of iNIBP monitoring during anaesthesia induction, for 10% of the measurements, the iNIBP mode switched to the dNIBP mode. Previous studies have reported that body motion and arrhythmia might affect determination of the measurement method (Sasaki et al 2015). We hypothesised that acute changes in blood pressure might affect the measurement method.…”

“…A previous study (Onodera et al 2011) showed that BP could be determined by the iNIBP mode in 13.0 ± 2.3 seconds, whereas it took 32.7 ± 13.6 seconds to determine BP by the conventional dNIBP mode under stable haemodynamic conditions. On the other hand, iNIBP monitoring automatically switches its measurement mode to the dNIPB mode in certain situations, including during acute blood pressure changes, arrhythmias, body motion or patient interaction with the cuff, resulting in delayed BP measurement (Sasaki et al 2015).…”