-
Je něco špatně v tomto záznamu ?
Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock
J. Seidlerová, P. Tůmová, R. Rokyta, M. Hromadka,
Jazyk angličtina Země Velká Británie
Typ dokumentu časopisecké články, práce podpořená grantem
NLK
BioMedCentral
od 2001-12-01
BioMedCentral Open Access
od 2001
Directory of Open Access Journals
od 2001
Free Medical Journals
od 2001
PubMed Central
od 2001
Europe PubMed Central
od 2001
ProQuest Central
od 2009-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2001-01-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2001-06-01
Open Access Digital Library
od 2001-01-01
Medline Complete (EBSCOhost)
od 2001-01-01
Health & Medicine (ProQuest)
od 2009-01-01
ROAD: Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources
od 2001
Springer Nature OA/Free Journals
od 2001-12-01
- MeSH
- arteriální tlak * MeSH
- časové faktory MeSH
- kardiogenní šok diagnóza patofyziologie MeSH
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- měření krevního tlaku metody MeSH
- oscilometrie MeSH
- poslech MeSH
- prediktivní hodnota testů MeSH
- příjem pacientů * MeSH
- prospektivní studie MeSH
- reprodukovatelnost výsledků MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- Check Tag
- lidé středního věku MeSH
- lidé MeSH
- mužské pohlaví MeSH
- senioři MeSH
- ženské pohlaví MeSH
- Publikační typ
- časopisecké články MeSH
- práce podpořená grantem MeSH
BACKGROUND: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a "gold standard" 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.
Citace poskytuje Crossref.org
- 000
- 00000naa a2200000 a 4500
- 001
- bmc20006238
- 003
- CZ-PrNML
- 005
- 20200525093114.0
- 007
- ta
- 008
- 200511s2019 xxk f 000 0|eng||
- 009
- AR
- 024 7_
- $a 10.1186/s12872-019-1129-9 $2 doi
- 035 __
- $a (PubMed)31215405
- 040 __
- $a ABA008 $b cze $d ABA008 $e AACR2
- 041 0_
- $a eng
- 044 __
- $a xxk
- 100 1_
- $a Seidlerová, Jitka $u Internal Department II, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic. Biomedical Centre, Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
- 245 10
- $a Factors influencing the accuracy of non-invasive blood pressure measurements in patients admitted for cardiogenic shock / $c J. Seidlerová, P. Tůmová, R. Rokyta, M. Hromadka,
- 520 9_
- $a BACKGROUND: Although invasively measured blood pressure (invBP) is regarded as a "gold standard" 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.
- 650 _2
- $a senioři $7 D000368
- 650 12
- $a arteriální tlak $7 D062186
- 650 _2
- $a poslech $7 D001314
- 650 _2
- $a měření krevního tlaku $x metody $7 D001795
- 650 _2
- $a ženské pohlaví $7 D005260
- 650 _2
- $a lidé $7 D006801
- 650 _2
- $a mužské pohlaví $7 D008297
- 650 _2
- $a lidé středního věku $7 D008875
- 650 _2
- $a oscilometrie $7 D009991
- 650 12
- $a příjem pacientů $7 D010343
- 650 _2
- $a prediktivní hodnota testů $7 D011237
- 650 _2
- $a prospektivní studie $7 D011446
- 650 _2
- $a reprodukovatelnost výsledků $7 D015203
- 650 _2
- $a kardiogenní šok $x diagnóza $x patofyziologie $7 D012770
- 650 _2
- $a časové faktory $7 D013997
- 655 _2
- $a časopisecké články $7 D016428
- 655 _2
- $a práce podpořená grantem $7 D013485
- 700 1_
- $a Tůmová, Pavlína $u Cardiology Department, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen and Faculty Hospital, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Rokyta, Richard $u Cardiology Department, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen and Faculty Hospital, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic.
- 700 1_
- $a Hromadka, Milan $u Cardiology Department, University Hospital and Faculty of Medicine in Pilsen and Faculty Hospital, Charles University, Pilsen, Czech Republic. hromadka@fnplzen.cz.
- 773 0_
- $w MED00006809 $t BMC cardiovascular disorders $x 1471-2261 $g Roč. 19, č. 1 (2019), s. 150
- 856 41
- $u https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31215405 $y Pubmed
- 910 __
- $a ABA008 $b sig $c sign $y a $z 0
- 990 __
- $a 20200511 $b ABA008
- 991 __
- $a 20200525093115 $b ABA008
- 999 __
- $a ok $b bmc $g 1525096 $s 1096294
- BAS __
- $a 3
- BAS __
- $a PreBMC
- BMC __
- $a 2019 $b 19 $c 1 $d 150 $e 20190618 $i 1471-2261 $m BMC cardiovascular disorders $n BMC Cardiovasc Disord $x MED00006809
- LZP __
- $a Pubmed-20200511