Skip to main content
PMC home page
Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health logoLink to Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health
. 1992 Apr;46(2):164–169. doi: 10.1136/jech.46.2.164

The Dinamap 1846SX automated blood pressure recorder: comparison with the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer under field conditions.

P H Whincup 1, N G Bruce 1, D G Cook 1, A G Shaper 1
PMCID: PMC1059528  PMID: 1583434

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE--The aim was to compare the performance of the Dinamap 1846SX automated oscillometric blood pressure recorder with that of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer during use under field study conditions. DESIGN--Two independent within subject measurement comparisons were made, one in adults and one in children, each conducted in three stages over several months while the Dinamap instruments were being used in epidemiological field surveys. SETTING--The studies were done in outpatients clinics (adults) and primary schools (children). PARTICIPANTS--141 adults (20-85 years) and 152 children (5-7 years) took part. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS--In adults a pair of measurements was made with each instrument, the order alternating for consecutive subjects. In children one measurements was made with each instrument, in random order. Measurements with the Dinamap 1846SX were higher than those with the random zero sphygmomanometer both in adults (mean difference 8.1 mm Hg; 95% CI 6.5 to 9.7 mm Hg) and in children (mean difference 8.3 mm Hg; 95% CI 6.9 to 9.7 mm Hg). Diastolic measurements were on average very similar both in adults and in children. The results were consistent at all three stages of both studies. The differences in systolic measurement were independent of blood pressure level. However, the extent of agreement in diastolic pressure depended on the diastolic blood pressure level; in both studies Dinamap diastolic measurements were higher at low diastolic pressures while random zero diastolic measurements were higher at high diastolic pressures. CONCLUSIONS--Systolic measurements made with the Dinamap 1846SX instrument are not directly comparable with those of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer and are unlikely to be comparable with those of earlier Dinamap models. These differences have important implications for clinical practice and for comparisons of blood pressure measurement between epidemiological studies. However, the consistency of measurement by the Dinamap 1846SX over time suggests that the instrument may have a place in standardised blood pressure measurement in the research setting.

Full text

PDF
164

Selected References

These references are in PubMed. This may not be the complete list of references from this article.

  1. Bland J. M., Altman D. G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986 Feb 8;1(8476):307–310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  2. Borow K. M., Newburger J. W. Noninvasive estimation of central aortic pressure using the oscillometric method for analyzing systemic artery pulsatile blood flow: comparative study of indirect systolic, diastolic, and mean brachial artery pressure with simultaneous direct ascending aortic pressure measurements. Am Heart J. 1982 May;103(5):879–886. doi: 10.1016/0002-8703(82)90403-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  3. Bruce N. G., Cook D. G., Shaper A. G., Thomson A. G. Geographical variations in blood pressure in British men and women. J Clin Epidemiol. 1990;43(4):385–398. doi: 10.1016/0895-4356(90)90124-8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Bruce N. G., Shaper A. G., Walker M., Wannamethee G. Observer bias in blood pressure studies. J Hypertens. 1988 May;6(5):375–380. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Colan S. D., Fujii A., Borow K. M., MacPherson D., Sanders S. P. Noninvasive determination of systolic, diastolic and end-systolic blood pressure in neonates, infants and young children: comparison with central aortic pressure measurements. Am J Cardiol. 1983 Oct 1;52(7):867–870. doi: 10.1016/0002-9149(83)90430-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  6. Ellison R. C., Gamble W. J., Taft D. S. A device for the automatic measurement of blood pressure in epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidemiol. 1984 Oct;120(4):542–549. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113915. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Evans J. G., Prior I. A. Experience with the random-zero sphygmomanometer. Br J Prev Soc Med. 1970 Feb;24(1):10–15. doi: 10.1136/jech.24.1.10. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  8. Friesen R. H., Lichtor J. L. Indirect measurement of blood pressure in neonates and infants utilizing an automatic noninvasive oscillometric monitor. Anesth Analg. 1981 Oct;60(10):742–745. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  9. GARROW J. S. ZERO-MUDDLER FOR UNPREJUDICED SPHYGMOMANOMETRY. Lancet. 1963 Dec 7;2(7319):1205–1205. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(63)92929-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  10. Hutton P., Dye J., Prys-Roberts C. An assessment of the Dinamap 845. Anaesthesia. 1984 Mar;39(3):261–267. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1984.tb07240.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  11. Jenner D. A., Beilin L. J., Vandongen R., DeKlerk N. H. A comparison of blood pressure measurements obtained with the Dinamap 845XT, the standard mercury sphygmomanometer and the London School of Hygiene device. Clin Exp Hypertens A. 1988;10(4):575–588. doi: 10.3109/10641968809033910. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  12. Johnson C. J., Kerr J. H. Automatic blood pressure monitors. A clinical evaluation of five models in adults. Anaesthesia. 1985 May;40(5):471–478. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1985.tb10851.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Kimble K. J., Darnall R. A., Jr, Yelderman M., Ariagno R. L., Ream A. K. An automated oscillometric technique for estimating mean arterial pressure in critically ill newborns. Anesthesiology. 1981 May;54(5):423–425. doi: 10.1097/00000542-198105000-00016. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  14. Linden W., Wright J. M. Lack of comparability of two automated blood pressure monitors in a hypertensive population. Clin Invest Med. 1986;9(2):71–75. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Maheswaran R., Zezulka A. V., Gill J. S., Beevers M., Davies P., Beevers D. G. Clinical evaluation of the Copal UA-251 and the Dinamap 1848 automatic blood-pressure monitors. J Med Eng Technol. 1988 Jul-Aug;12(4):160–163. doi: 10.3109/03091908809030175. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. O'Brien E., Mee F., Atkins N., O'Malley K. Inaccuracy of the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer. Lancet. 1990 Dec 15;336(8729):1465–1468. doi: 10.1016/0140-6736(90)93177-q. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. O'Brien E., Petrie J. C., Littler W. A., de Swiet M. Standards for blood pressure measuring devices. Br Med J (Clin Res Ed) 1987 May 16;294(6582):1245–1246. doi: 10.1136/bmj.294.6582.1245. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. Ornstein S., Markert G., Litchfield L., Zemp L. Evaluation of the DINAMAP blood pressure monitor in an ambulatory primary care setting. J Fam Pract. 1988 May;26(5):517–521. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  19. Park M. K., Menard S. M. Accuracy of blood pressure measurement by the Dinamap monitor in infants and children. Pediatrics. 1987 Jun;79(6):907–914. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Pellegrini-Caliumi G., Agostino R., Nodari S., Maffei G., Moretti C., Bucci G. Evaluation of an automatic oscillometric method and of various cuffs for the measurement of arterial pressure in the neonate. Acta Paediatr Scand. 1982 Sep;71(5):791–797. doi: 10.1111/j.1651-2227.1982.tb09521.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  21. ROSE G. A., HOLLAND W. W., CROWLEY E. A. A SPHYGMOMANOMETER FOR EPIDEMIOLOGISTS. Lancet. 1964 Feb 8;1(7328):296–300. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(64)92408-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. ROSE G. STANDARDISATION OF OBSERVERS IN BLOOD-PRESSURE MEASUREMENT. Lancet. 1965 Mar 27;1(7387):673–674. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(65)91827-1. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  23. Ramsey M., 3rd Noninvasive automatic determination of mean arterial pressure. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1979 Jan;17(1):11–18. doi: 10.1007/BF02440948. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  24. Rutten A. J., Ilsley A. H., Skowronski G. A., Runciman W. B. A comparative study of the measurement of mean arterial blood pressure using automatic oscillometers, arterial cannulation and auscultation. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1986 Feb;14(1):58–65. doi: 10.1177/0310057X8601400113. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Silas J. H., Barker A. T., Ramsay L. E. Clinical evaluation of Dinamap 845 automated blood pressure recorder. Br Heart J. 1980 Feb;43(2):202–205. doi: 10.1136/hrt.43.2.202. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  26. Wareham J. A., Haugh L. D., Yeager S. B., Horbar J. D. Prediction of arterial blood pressure in the premature neonate using the oscillometric method. Am J Dis Child. 1987 Oct;141(10):1108–1110. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1987.04460100086034. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  27. Weaver M. G., Park M. K., Lee D. H. Differences in blood pressure levels obtained by auscultatory and oscillometric methods. Am J Dis Child. 1990 Aug;144(8):911–914. doi: 10.1001/archpedi.1990.02150320075031. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  28. Whincup P. H., Cook D. G., Shaper A. G. Blood pressure measurement in children: the importance of cuff bladder size. J Hypertens. 1989 Oct;7(10):845–850. doi: 10.1097/00004872-198910000-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  29. Whincup P. H., Cook D. G., Shaper A. G., Macfarlane D. J., Walker M. Blood pressure in British children: associations with adult blood pressure and cardiovascular mortality. Lancet. 1988 Oct 15;2(8616):890–893. doi: 10.1016/s0140-6736(88)92481-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  30. Yelderman M., Ream A. K. Indirect measurement of mean blood pressure in the anesthetized patient. Anesthesiology. 1979 Mar;50(3):253–256. doi: 10.1097/00000542-197903000-00022. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  31. de Gaudemaris R., Folsom A. R., Prineas R. J., Luepker R. V. The random-zero versus the standard mercury sphygmomanometer: a systematic blood pressure difference. Am J Epidemiol. 1985 Feb;121(2):282–290. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113998. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health are provided here courtesy of BMJ Publishing Group

RESOURCES