Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00669806%3A_____%2F19%3A10394765" target="_blank" >RIV/00669806:_____/19:10394765 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11140/19:10394765

Výsledek na webu

<a href="https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=63GQpMuFG4" target="_blank" >https://verso.is.cuni.cz/pub/verso.fpl?fname=obd_publikace_handle&handle=63GQpMuFG4</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9" target="_blank" >10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Background: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a &quot;gold standard&quot; in critically ill cardiac patients, the non-invasive BP is still widely used, at least at the initiation of medical care. The erroneous interpretation of BP can lead to clinical errors. We therefore investigated the agreement of both methods with respect to some common clinical situation. Methods: We included 85 patients hospitalized for cardiogenic shock. We measured BP every 6 h for the first 72 h of hospitalization, in all patients. Each set of BP measurements included two invasive (invBP), two auscultatory (auscBP), and two oscillometric (oscBP) BP measurements. InvBP was considered as a gold standard. Mean non-invasive arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated as (diastolic pressure + (pulse pressure ÷ 3)). We used Bland-Altman analysis and we calculated concordance correlation coefficients to assess agreement between different BP methods. Results: We obtained 967 sets of BP measurements. AuscMAP and oscMAP were on average only 0.4 +- 8.2 and 1.8 +- 8.5 mmHg higher than invMAP, respectively. On the other hand, auscSBP and oscSBP were on average - 6.1 +- 11.4 and - 4.1 +- 9.8 mmHg lower than invSBP, respectively. However, the mean differences and variability for systolic and diastolic BP variability were large; the 2 standard deviation differences were +- 24 and 18 mmHg. In hypotension, non-invasive BP tended to be higher than invBP while the opposite was true for high BP values. Clinical conditions associated with hypotension generally worsened the accuracy of non-invasive MAP. Conclusions: Mean arterial pressure measured non-invasively appears to be in good agreement with invasive MAP in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock. Several clinical associated with hypotension can affect accuracy of non-invasive measurement. Auscultatory and oscillometric measurements had similar accuracy even in patients with arrhythmia.

Název v anglickém jazyce

Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock

Popis výsledku anglicky

Background: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a &quot;gold standard&quot; in critically ill cardiac patients, the non-invasive BP is still widely used, at least at the initiation of medical care. The erroneous interpretation of BP can lead to clinical errors. We therefore investigated the agreement of both methods with respect to some common clinical situation. Methods: We included 85 patients hospitalized for cardiogenic shock. We measured BP every 6 h for the first 72 h of hospitalization, in all patients. Each set of BP measurements included two invasive (invBP), two auscultatory (auscBP), and two oscillometric (oscBP) BP measurements. InvBP was considered as a gold standard. Mean non-invasive arterial pressure (MAP) was calculated as (diastolic pressure + (pulse pressure ÷ 3)). We used Bland-Altman analysis and we calculated concordance correlation coefficients to assess agreement between different BP methods. Results: We obtained 967 sets of BP measurements. AuscMAP and oscMAP were on average only 0.4 +- 8.2 and 1.8 +- 8.5 mmHg higher than invMAP, respectively. On the other hand, auscSBP and oscSBP were on average - 6.1 +- 11.4 and - 4.1 +- 9.8 mmHg lower than invSBP, respectively. However, the mean differences and variability for systolic and diastolic BP variability were large; the 2 standard deviation differences were +- 24 and 18 mmHg. In hypotension, non-invasive BP tended to be higher than invBP while the opposite was true for high BP values. Clinical conditions associated with hypotension generally worsened the accuracy of non-invasive MAP. Conclusions: Mean arterial pressure measured non-invasively appears to be in good agreement with invasive MAP in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock. Several clinical associated with hypotension can affect accuracy of non-invasive measurement. Auscultatory and oscillometric measurements had similar accuracy even in patients with arrhythmia.

Druh

J_imp - Článek v periodiku v databázi Web of Science

CEP obor

—

OECD FORD obor

30201 - Cardiac and Cardiovascular systems

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

I - Institucionalni podpora na dlouhodoby koncepcni rozvoj vyzkumne organizace

Rok uplatnění

2019

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

BMC Cardiovascular Disorders

ISSN

1471-2261

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

19

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

1

Stát vydavatele periodika

GB - Spojené království Velké Británie a Severního Irska

Počet stran výsledku

10

Strana od-do

150

Kód UT WoS článku

000472020500002

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-85067600126