Abstract
Objetivo
Validar dos monitores comercializados para la automedida de la presión arterial (AMPA), uno automático (OMRON HEM-705 CP) y otro semiautomático (OMRON M1).
Diseño
Estudio descriptivo de validación de pruebas diagnósticas.
Emplazamiento
Atención primaria. Centro de Salud Universitario San Pablo de Sevilla.
Participantes
Ochenta y cinco individuos (20 varones y 65 mujeres) con amplio rango de edades y de presión arterial (PA), pertenecientes a la población atendida en el centro de salud o al personal del mismo. Se excluyeron las personas con arritmias o con fase V de Korotkoff próxima a cero.
Mediciones y resultados principales
Se comparan las medidas de PA y frecuencia cardíaca (FC) obtenidas con los aparatos de AMPA a validar frente a las obtenidas con un esfigmomanómetro de mercurio, utilizado como método de referencia. Las diferencias entre los aparatos de AMPA y el «patrón oro» se cuantifican y representan mediante la gradación propuesta por el protocolo de la British Hypertension Society (BHS).
La media (± DE) de las diferencias de la PA sistólica (en mmHg) entre los aparatos evaluados y el de referencia fue de 1,08 ± 4,73 para el monitor automático y de 1,25 ± 5,30 para el semiautomático. Las diferencias medias de la PA diastólica fueron de 0,44 ± 4,03 para el monitor automático y 0,51 ± 3,90 para el semiautomático. El porcentaje acumulado de diferencias de PA sistólica/diastólica ≤5, 10 y 15 mmHg fue del 85,5, 98, 98,8/90,6, 98,4 y 100%, respectivamente, para el monitor automático, y del 82,7, 95,7, 98,8/91, 99,6 y 100% para el semiautomático. Esto supone un grado A del protocolo de la BHS, que se mantiene al analizar los resultados por rangos de PA.
Conclusiones
Ambos monitores satisfacen los criterios de validación aceptados internacionalmente, por lo que se puede recomendarlos para el seguimiento y autocontrol de la PA en el hipertenso.
Palabras clave: Automedida de la presión arterial, Validación, Monitores
Abstract
Objective
To validate two monitors on the market for self-measurement of blood pressure (SMBP), an automatic one (OMRON HEM-705 CP) and a semi-automatic one (OMRON M1)
Design
Descriptive study of validation of diagnostic tests.
Setting
Primary care. San Pablo University Health Centre, Sevilla.
Participants
85 individuals (20 men and 65 women) with a wide range of age and blood pressure (BP), belonging to the population attended at the health centre or to its staff. People with arrhythmia and Korotkoff ‘s V phase close to zero were excluded.
Main measurements and results
BP and cardiac frequency (CF) measurements obtained with the SMBP devices to be validated were compared with readings on a mercury sphygmomanometer, used as the standard method. The differences between the SMBP devices and the gold standard were quantified and are presented on the scale proposed by the protocol of the British Hypertension Society (BHS). The mean (±SD) of the systolic BP differences (in mm Hg) between the devices evaluated and the standard device was 1.08±4.73 for the automatic monitor and 1.25±5.30 for the semi-automatic one. The mean differences of diastolic BP were 0.44±4.03 for the automatic monitor, and 0.51±3.90 for the semi-automatic one. The cumulative percentage differences of systolic/ diastolic BP≤5, 10 and 15 mm Hg were 85.5, 98, 98.8/90.6, 98.4, 100% for the automatic monitor and 82.7, 95.7, 98.8/91, 99.6, 100% for the semi-automatic one. This supposes a Grade A on the BHS procedure, which is maintained on analysis of the results by blood pressure rankings.
Conclusion
As both monitors meet the internationally accepted validation criteria, they can be recommended for the monitoring and self-monitoring of BP in patients with hypertension.
Key words: Self-measurement of blood pressure, Validation, Monitors
Bibliografía
- 1.Buitrago F., Martínez A. Utilidad de los aparatos de autocontrol de la presión arterial. FMC. 1999;6:576–583. [Google Scholar]
- 2.Pickering T., Coats A., Mallion J., Mancia G., Verdecchia P. Task Force V: white-coat hypertension. Blood Press Monit. 1999;4:333–341. doi: 10.1097/00126097-199912000-00006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 3.Asmar R., Zanchetti A. Guidelines for the use of self-blood pressure monitoring: a summary report of the first international consensus conference. J Hypertens. 2000;18:493–508. doi: 10.1097/00004872-200018050-00001. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 4.Beevers G., Lip G., O’Brien E. Blood pressure measurement. Part II –Conventional sphygmomanometry: technique of auscultatory blood pressure measurement. BMJ. 2001;322:1043–1047. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7293.1043. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 5.White W., Asmar R., Imai Y., Mansoor G., Padfield P., Thijs L. Task Force VI: self monitoring of the blood pressure. Blood Press Monit. 1999;4:343–351. doi: 10.1097/00126097-199912000-00007. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 6.Krecke H-J., Lütkes P., Maiwald M. Patient assessment of self-measurement of blood pressure: results of a telephone survey in Germany. J Hypertens. 1996;14:323–326. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199603000-00008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 7.American College of Physicians Automated ambulatory blood pressure and self-measured blood pressure monitoring devices: their role in the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Ann Intern Med. 1993;118:889–892. doi: 10.7326/0003-4819-118-11-199306010-00010. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 8.Pickering T.G., for an American Society of Hypertension Ad Hoc Panel Recommendations for the use of home (self) and ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. Am J Hypertens. 1996;9:1–11. doi: 10.1016/0895-7061(95)00341-x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 9.The Joint National Committee on Prevention. Detection. Evaluation. Treatment of High Blood Pressure The Sixth report of the Joint National Committee on prevention, detection, evaluation and treatment of high blood pressure. Arch Intern Med. 1997;157:2413–2446. doi: 10.1001/archinte.157.21.2413. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 10.Chalmers J., Mac Mahon S., Mancia G., Whitworth J., Beilin L., Hansson L. World Health Organization-International Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension. Guidelines Subcommitee. J Hypertens. 1999;17:151–183. [Google Scholar]
- 11.O’Brien E., Beevers G., Lip G. Blood pressure measurement. Part IV -Automated sphygmomanometry: self blood pressure measurement. BMJ. 2001;322:1167–1170. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7295.1167. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 12.Yarows S., Julius S., Pickering T. Home blood pressure monitoring. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:1251–1257. doi: 10.1001/archinte.160.9.1251. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 13.Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation . American National Standard for electronic or automated sphygmomanometers. AAMI; Washington DC: 1987. [Google Scholar]
- 14.O’Brien E., Petrie J., Littler W., De Swiet M., Padfield P.L., O’-Malley K. The British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of automated and semi-automated blood pressure measuring devices with special reference to ambulatory systems. J Hypertens. 1990;8:607–619. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199007000-00004. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 15.White W.B., Berson A.S., Robbins C., Jamieson M.J., Prisnat M., Roccella E. National standard for measurement of resting and ambulatory blood pressures with automated sphygmomano-meters. Hypertension. 1993;21:504–509. doi: 10.1161/01.hyp.21.4.504. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 16.O’Brien E., Petrie J., Littler W., De Swiet M., Padfield P.L., Altman D.G. The British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens. 1993;11(Suppl 2):43–62. doi: 10.1097/00004872-199306000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 17.Bland J.M., Altman D.G. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–310. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 18.Artigao L.M., Llavador J.J., Sanchís C., López J., Torres C., Rubio M. Evaluación de tres dispositivos semiautomáticos para la automedición de la presión arterial de acuerdo a los protocolos de la Sociedad Británica de Hipertensión y de la AAMI: mode-los Omron M4, M1 y MX2. Hipertensión. 1998;15:87–88. [Google Scholar]
- 19.Artigao L.M., Llavador J.J., Puras A., López J., Rubio M.M., Torres C. Evaluación y validación de los monitores Omron Hem 705 CP y Hem 706/711 para automedidas de presión arterial. Aten Primaria. 2000;25:96–103. doi: 10.1016/S0212-6567(00)78470-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 20.O’Brien E., Mee F., Atkins N., Thomas M. Evaluation of three devices for self-measurement of blood pressure according to the revised British Hypertension Society Protocol: the Omron HEM-705 CP, Philips HP5332, and Nissei DS-175. Blood Pressure Monitoring. 1996;1:55–61. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- 21.O’Brien E., Waeber B., Parati G., Staesen J., Myers M. Blood pressure measuring devices: recommendations of the European Society of Hypertension. BMJ. 2001;322:531–536. doi: 10.1136/bmj.322.7285.531. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]