Browse > Article
http://dx.doi.org/10.3345/kjp.2011.54.11.463

Validation study of the Dinamap ProCare 200 upper arm blood pressure monitor in children and adolescents  

Lee, Chong-Guk (Department of Pediatrics, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine)
Park, Hyang-Mi (Department of Pediatrics, National Medical Center)
Shin, Hye-Jung (Department of Pediatrics, National Medical Center)
Moon, Jin-Soo (Department of Pediatrics, Inje University Ilsan Paik Hospital, Inje University College of Medicine)
Hong, Young-Mi (Department of Pediatrics, Ewha Womans University Mockdong Hospital, Ewha Womans University School of Medicine)
Kim, Nam-Soo (Department of Pediatrics, Hanyang University Seoul Hospital, Hanyang University College of Medicine)
Ha, Il-Soo (Department of Pediatrics, Seoul National University Children's Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
Chang, Myeong-Jin (Department of Chronic Disease Investigation, Korea Center for Disease and Prevention)
Oh, Kyeong-Won (Department of Chronic Disease Investigation, Korea Center for Disease and Prevention)
Publication Information
Clinical and Experimental Pediatrics / v.54, no.11, 2011 , pp. 463-469 More about this Journal
Abstract
Purpose: To validate the Dinamap ProCare 200 blood pressure (BP) monitor against a mercury sphygmomanometer in children 7 to 18 years old in accordance with the 2010 International Protocol of European Society of Hypertension (ESH-IP2) and the British Hypertension Society (BHS) protocol. Methods: Forty-five children were recruited for the study. A validation procedure was performed following the protocol based on the ESH-IP2 and BHS protocols for children and adolescents. Each subject underwent 7 sequential BP measurements alternatively with a mercury sphygmomanometer and the test device by trained nurses. The results were analyzed according to the validation criteria of ESH-IP2. Results: The mean (${\pm}SD$) difference in the absolute BP values between test device and mercury sphygmomanometer readings was $1.85{\pm}1.65$ mmHg for systolic BP (SBP) and $4.41{\pm}3.53$ mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP). These results fulfilled the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation criterion of a mean${\pm}$SD below $5{\pm}8$ mmHg for both SBP and DBP. The percentages of test device-observer mercury sphygmomanometer BP differences within 5, 10, and 15 mmHg were 96%, 100%, and 100% for SBP, and 69%, 92%, and 100% for DBP, respectively, in the part 1 analysis; both SBP and DBP passed the part 1 criteria. In the part 2 analysis, SBP passed the criteria but DBP failed. Conclusion: Although the Dinamap ProCare 200 BP monitor failed an adapted ESH-IP2, SBP passed. When comparing BP readings measured by oscillometers and mercury sphygmomanometers, one has to consider the differences between them, particularly in DBP, because DBP can be underestimated.
Keywords
Blood pressure; Oscillometric device; Dinamap; Validation studies; International protocol;
Citations & Related Records
Times Cited By KSCI : 1  (Citation Analysis)
연도 인용수 순위
1 O'Brien E, Petrie J, Littler W, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Altman DG, et al. An outline of the revised British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens 1993;11:677-9.   DOI   ScienceOn
2 O'Brien E, Pickering T, Asmar R, Myers M, Parati G, Staessen J, et al. Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults. Blood Press Monit 2002;7:3-17.   DOI   ScienceOn
3 O'Brien E, Atkins N, Stergiou G, Karpettas N, Parati G, Asmar R, et al. European Society of Hypertension International Protocol revision 2010 for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults. Blood Press Monit 2010;15:23-38.   DOI   ScienceOn
4 Lee CG, Moon JS, Choi JM, Nam CM, Lee SY, Oh K, et al. Normative blood pressure references for Korean children and adolescents. Korean J Pediatr 2008;51:33-41.   DOI   ScienceOn
5 Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet 1986;1:307-10.
6 Wong SN, Tz Sung RY, Leung LC. Validation of three oscillometric blood pressure devices against auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in children. Blood Press Monit 2006;11:281-91.   DOI   ScienceOn
7 Narogan MV, Narogan MI, Syutkina EV. Validation of A&D UA-778 blood pressure monitor in children. Blood Press Monit 2009;14:228-31.   DOI   ScienceOn
8 Reinders A, Reggiori F, Shennan AH. Validation of the DINAMAP ProCare blood pressure device according to the international protocol in an adult population. Blood Press Monit 2006;11:293-6.   DOI   ScienceOn
9 Park MK, Menard SW, Yuan C. Comparison of auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressures. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2001;155:50-3.   DOI
10 Centers for Disease Control (CDC). National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) Health Tech / Blood Pressure Procedure Manual. Hyattsville: CDC, 2009.
11 National High Blood Pressure Education Program Working Group on High Blood Pressure in Children and Adolescents. The fourth report on the diagnosis, evaluation, and treatment of high blood pressure in children and adolescents. Pediatrics 2004;114(2 Suppl 4th Report):555-76.   DOI
12 Pickering TG. What will replace the mercury sphygmomanometer? Blood Press Monit 2003;8:23-5.   DOI   ScienceOn
13 Canzanello VJ, Jensen PL, Schwartz GL. Are aneroid sphygmomanometers accurate in hospital and clinic settings? Arch Intern Med 2001;161:729-31.   DOI   ScienceOn
14 van Montfrans GA. Oscillometric blood pressure measurement: progress and problems. Blood Press Monit 2001;6:287-90.   DOI   ScienceOn
15 American National Standards Institute, Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. American national standard for electronic or automated sphygmomanometers. Arlington: AAMI, c1987.