Comparative evaluation of blood pressure measuring equipment

Authors

  • Erika Kaori Oka School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Liza Taveira Fleury Curado School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Lucio Murilo dos Santos Department of Diagnosis and Surgery – School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Mauro Santamaria Department of Diagnosis and Surgery – School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Michelle Bianchi Moraes Department of Diagnosis and Surgery – School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Rodrigo Dias Nascimento Department of Diagnosis and Surgery – School of Dentistry – Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – São José dos Campos – SP – Brazil.
  • Fernando Vagner Haldi Institute of Science and Technology – UNESP – Univ Estadual Paulista – School of Dentistry

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14295/bds.2014.v17i4.1007

Abstract

Objective: This study evaluated the agreement of blood pressure measurements obtained through different auscultatory and oscillometric automated/semi-automated monitors. Material and Methods: The blood pressure of 30 participants was evaluated by a single calibrated examiner. The measurements were carried out through either auscultatory monitor (mercury column or aneroid) or automated/semiautomated oscillometric pulse monitors. For each participant, 5 min rest was established by sitting on dental chair and the measurements were always carried out on the left arm, at the heart level. Three consecutive measurements were performed with the four monitors in each participant with a minimum time interval of five minutes between each measurement. All monitors were properly calibrated and certified by INMETRO. The results were submitted to intraclass correlation coefficient and Friedman’s analysis of variance. Results: The measurements of systolic blood pressure for both auscultatory and oscillometric methods were similar. The measurements of diastolic blood pressure for auscultatory monitors were similar (p > 0.05); as well as for oscillometric monitors (p > 0.05). However, when auscultatory and oscillometric monitors were compared, there were statistically significant differences in diastolic blood pressure (p < 0.05). Conclusion: It was verified a difference in the results between the auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressure monitors. The systolic blood pressure measurements exhibited similar correlations, while
diastolic blood pressure measurements showed different correlations. 

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Downloads

Published

2014-11-03

How to Cite

1.
Oka EK, Fleury Curado LT, Santos LM dos, Santamaria M, Moraes MB, Nascimento RD, et al. Comparative evaluation of blood pressure measuring equipment. BDS [Internet]. 2014 Nov. 3 [cited 2025 Aug. 21];17(4):48-52. Available from: https://ojs.ict.unesp.br/index.php/cob/article/view/1007

Issue

Vol. 17 No. 4 (2014): Oct. - Dec. / 2014 - Published November 2014

Section

Clinical or Laboratorial Research

License

Brazilian Dental Science uses the Creative Commons (CC-BY 4.0) license, thus preserving the integrity of articles in an open access environment. The journal allows the author to retain publishing rights without restrictions.

=================

COPYRIGHT TRANSFER AND RESPONSIBILITY STATEMENT
 (PDF)

For all articles published in the BDS journal, copyright is retained by the authors. Articles are licensed under an open-access Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, meaning that anyone may download and read the paper for free. In addition, the article may be reused and quoted, provided that the original published version is cited. These conditions allow for maximum use and exposure of the work while ensuring that the authors receive proper credit. All metadata associated with published articles is released under the Creative Commons CC0 Universal Public Domain Dedication.

Before the submission, authors must obtain permission to reproduce any published material (figures, schemes, tables, or any extract of a text) that does not fall into the public domain or for which they do not hold the copyright. Permission should be requested by the authors from the copyright holder (usually the Publisher, please refer to the imprint of the individual publications to identify the copyright holder).

The authors hereby attest that the study is original and does not present manipulated data, fraud, or plagiarism. All names listed made a significant scientific contribution to the study, are aware of the presented data, and agree with the final version of the manuscript. They assume complete responsibility for the ethical aspects of the study.

This text must be printed and signed by all authors. The scanned version should be submitted as supplemental file during the submission process.

Most read articles by the same author(s)