ASSESSMENT OF BLOOD PRESSURE WITH THREE DIFFERENT BLOOD PRESSURE APPARATUS (MERCURY, DIGITAL , ANEROID )
Main Article Content
Keywords
Digital BP Apparatus, Mercury BP Apparatus, Aneroid BP Apparatus, BP measurement.
Abstract
Introduction- Hypertension is a prominent risk factor for the onset of cardiovascular disease and is a significant contributor to global morbidity and mortality. Traditionally, the first step in managing hypertension is to make a diagnosis based on many readings of blood pressure taken in a clinic or office. The potential consequences of inaccurate blood pressure measurement include the risk of misdiagnosis and subsequent administration of either inappropriate or inadequate therapy. Such outcomes have significant ethical issues and can also impact public health.
Objective: The objective of this study is to evaluate the accuracy of blood pressure measurements using three distinct blood pressure devices.
Method: The methodology involved the recruitment of 100 participants who were between the ages of 18 and 26 and had a normal body mass index (BMI), in accordance with the established inclusion criteria. Three separate devices were utilized to measure blood pressure, and the resulting data were documented.
Result: There was no statistically significant difference in systolic blood pressure (SBP) measurements when comparing the use of digital blood pressure apparatus to mercury-based apparatus, mercury-based apparatus to aneroid apparatus, and digital blood pressure apparatus to aneroid apparatus. Nevertheless, there exists a notable distinction in the readings of Digital and Aneroid devices for measuring diastolic blood pressure (DBP). There is no statistically significant difference observed in the diastolic blood pressure (DBP) values obtained with the other two instruments.
Conclusion: The statistical analysis conducted on the measurements of systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) obtained using mercury, aneroid, and digital devices leads to the conclusion that there is no significant difference among these measurement methods. The statistical significance of the DBP findings in the Digital versus Aneroid comparison indicates that the experimental hypothesis is partially accepted.
References
2. Campell, N. R. C., McKay, D. W., Chockalingam, A., & Fodor, J. G. (1994). Errors in assessment of blood pressure: Blood pressure measuring technique. Canadian Journal of Public Health, 85(5).
3. Eliasdottir, S. B., Steinthorsdottir, S. D., Indridason, O. S., Palsson, R., & Edvardsson, V. O. (2013). Comparison of aneroid and oscillometric blood pressure measurements in children. Journal of Clinical Hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.), 15(11), 776–783.
https://doi.org/10.1111/JCH.12196
4. Gill, G., Ala, L., Gurgel, R., & Cuevas, L. (2004). Accuracy of aneroid sphygmomanometer blood pressure recording compared with digital and mercury measurements in Brazil. Tropical Doctor, 34(1), 26–27. https://doi.org/10.1177/004947550403400112
5. Guimarães, I. C. B., De Almeida, A. M., Santos, A. S., Barbosa, D. B. V., & Guimarães, A. C. (2008). Blood pressure: effect of body mass index and of waist circumference on adolescents. Arquivos Brasileiros de Cardiologia, 90(6), 426–432. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0066-782X2008000600007
6. Hamied, L. I. A., Sofiatin, Y., Rakhmilla, L. E., Putripratama, A. A., & Roesli, R. M. A. (2015). Comparison of Mercury, Aneroid and Digital Sphygmomanometer in Community Setting. Journal of Hypertension, 33(Supplement 2), e33–e34.
https://doi.org/10.1097/01.HJH.0000469843.06908.C3
7. Handler, J. (2009). The importance of accurate blood pressure measurement. The Permanente Journal, 13(3), 51–54. https://doi.org/10.7812/TPP/09-054
8. https://med.libretexts.org/Bookshelves/Anatomy_and_Physiology/Anatomy_and_Physiology_(Boundless). (2015).
9. Johansson, J. K., Puukka, P. J., & Jula, A. M. (2014). Oscillometric and auscultatory blood pressure measurement in the assessment of blood pressure and target organ damage. Blood Pressure Monitoring, 19(1), 6–13. https://doi.org/10.1097/MBP.0000000000000012
10. Pickering, T. G. (2003). What will replace the mercury sphygmomanometer? Blood Pressure Monitoring, 8(1), 23–25. https://doi.org/10.1097/00126097-200302000-00005
11. Tolonen, H., Koponen, P., Naska, A., Männistö, S., Broda, G., Palosaari, T., & Kuulasmaa, K. (2015). Challenges in standardization of blood pressure measurement at the population level. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/S12874-015-0020-3
12. Zhu, S., Heshka, S., Wang, Z. M., Shen, W., Allison, D. B., Ross, R., & Heymsfield, S. B. (2004). Combination of BMI and Waist Circumference for Identifying Cardiovascular Risk Factors in Whites. Obesity Research, 12(4), 633–645. https://doi.org/10.1038/OBY.2004.73
Article Sidebar
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All articles published in JPTCP are licensed under Copyright Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Aakriti Upreti
BPT Student, Banarsidas Chandiwala Institute of Physiotherapy, New Delhi, India
Richa Hirendra Rai
BPT, MPT, MIAP, Assistant Professor, Banarsidas Chandiwala Institute of Physiotherapy, New Delhi, India
Jafar Khan
BPT, MPT, MIAP, Senior Consultant Physiotherapist and HOD Physiotherapy Siddhi Vinayak Hospital, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
KM Annamalai
Senior Consultant Physiotherapist & HOD Physiotherapy Apollo Hospital Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India
Vardhman Jain
MPT Ortho, Neuro Myoskeletal Technique, Neuro Myoskeletal Dry Needing Cupping Kinetics, Director & Senior Consultant Physiotherapist at Synergy Health Point (Founder and Director), Mumbai, Maharashtra