Abstract:Abstract Aims High blood pressure (BP) is the commonest modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, yet its monitoring remains problematic. Wearable cuffless BP devices offer potential solutions; however, little is known about their validity and utility. We aimed to systematically review the validity, features and clinical use of wearable cuffless BP devices. Methods and results We searched MEDLINE, Embase, IEEE Xplore and the Cochrane Database till December 2019 for studies that reported validating cuffless BP devices. We extracted information about study characteristics, device features, validation processes, and clinical applications. Devices were classified according to their functions and features. We defined devices with a mean systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) biases of <5 mmHg as valid as a consensus. Our definition of validity did not include assessment of device measurement precision, which is assessed by standard deviation of the mean difference—a critical component of ISO protocol validation criteria. Study quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies version 2 tool. A random-effects model meta-analysis was performed to summarise the mean biases for SBP and DBP across studies. Of the 430 studies identified, 16 studies (15 devices, 974 participants) were selected. The majority of devices (81.3%) used photoplethysmography to estimate BP against a reference device; other technologies included tonometry, auscultation and electrocardiogram. In addition to BP and heart rate, some devices also measured night-time BP (n = 5), sleep monitoring (n = 3), oxygen saturation (n = 3), temperature (n = 2) and electrocardiogram (n = 3). Eight devices showed mean biases of <5 mmHg for SBP and DBP compared with a reference device and three devices were commercially available. The meta-analysis showed no statistically significant differences between the wearable and reference devices for SBP (pooled mean difference = 3.42 mmHg, 95% CI: −2.17, 9.01, I2 95.4%) and DBP (pooled mean = 1.16 mmHg, 95% CI: −1.26, 3.58, I2 87.1%). Conclusion Several cuffless BP devices are currently available using different technologies, offering the potential for continuous BP monitoring. The variation in standards and validation protocols limited the comparability of findings across studies and the identification of the most accurate device. Challenges such as validation using standard protocols and in real-life settings must be overcome before they can be recommended for uptake into clinical practice.

Validation protocols for blood pressure-measuring devices: status quo and development needs

A Universal Standard for the Validation of Blood Pressure Measuring Devices: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO) Collaboration Statement.

P074 STRIDE BP SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF PUBLISHED VALIDATION STUDIES OF BLOOD PRESSURE MEASURING DEVICES

How to check whether a blood pressure monitor has been properly validated for accuracy

Wearable cuffless blood pressure monitoring devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis

METHODOLOGICAL AND DIAGNOSTIC RELIABILITY OF 24-H ABPM: A PARADIGM SHIFT IN DAILY CLINICAL PRACTICE?

Automated 'oscillometric' blood pressure measuring devices: how they work and what they measure

‘Legacy publication of a 2009 validation of the Riester Big Ben Square Desk aneroid device for blood pressure measurement according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults (2002)’

CURRENT STATUS OF USE OF VALIDATED DEVICES FOR HOME BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING AMONG PATIENTS WITH HYPERTENSION

History and evolution of blood pressure measurement

Ability of a 24-h ambulatory cuffless blood pressure monitoring device to track blood pressure changes in clinical practice

P077 IS THERE A DIFFERENCE IN THE ACCURACY OF AUTOMATED BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICES DESIGNED FOR HOME OR IN-CLINIC USE? A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS OF VALIDATION STUDIES

O30 AVAILABILITY OF PROPERLY VALIDATED AUTOMATED BLOOD PRESSURE MEASURING DEVICES FOR CHILDREN: STRIDE BP SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

O20 CURRENT 24-HOUR AMBULATORY BLOOD PRESSURE TECHNOLOGIES SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED AS THE REFERENCE STANDARD FOR VALIDATION OF CUFFLESS BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICES

P066 HOW BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICES ARE OBTAINED FOR HOME BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT: A MIXED-METHODS STUDY AMONG AUSTRALIA ADULTS

P064 SYSTEMATIC REVIEW OF PROPORTION OF FEMALES AND MALES RECRUITED IN BLOOD PRESSURE DEVICE VALIDATION STUDIES AND RELATIONSHIP WITH MEASUREMENT ACCURACY

Innovations in blood pressure measurement and reporting technology: International Society of Hypertension position paper endorsed by the World Hypertension League, European Society of Hypertension, Asian Pacific Society of Hypertension, and Latin American Society of Hypertension

Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension

Achieving reliable blood pressure measurements in clinical practice: It's time to meet the challenge

Validation of the Nissei DS-400 in a low-resource setting

Requirements for design and function of blood pressure measuring devices used for the management of hypertension: Consensus Statement by the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and STRIDE BP