Journal of Human Hypertension special issue on the accuracy of automated blood pressure measuring devices

James E. Sharman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-023-00806-0

2023-02-21

Journal of Human Hypertension

Abstract:Journal of Human Hypertension - Journal of Human Hypertension special issue on the accuracy of automated blood pressure measuring devices

peripheral vascular disease

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

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

Kazuomi Kario,Bryan Williams,Naoko Tomitani,Richard J McManus,Aletta E Schutte,Alberto Avolio,Daichi Shimbo,Ji-Guang Wang,Nadia A Khan,Dean S Picone,Isabella Tan,Peter H Charlton,Michihiro Satoh,Keneilwe Nkgola Mmopi,Jose P Lopez-Lopez,Tomas L Bothe,Elisabetta Bianchini,Buna Bhandari,Jesús Lopez-Rivera,Fadi J Charchar,Maciej Tomaszewski,George Stergiou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000003827

2024-09-09

Abstract:Blood pressure (BP) is a key contributor to the lifetime risk of preclinical organ damage and cardiovascular disease. Traditional clinic-based BP readings are typically measured infrequently and under standardized/resting conditions and therefore do not capture BP values during normal everyday activity. Therefore, current hypertension guidelines emphasize the importance of incorporating out-of-office BP measurement into strategies for hypertension diagnosis and management. However, conventional home and ambulatory BP monitoring devices use the upper-arm cuff oscillometric method and only provide intermittent BP readings under static conditions or in a limited number of situations. New innovations include technologies for BP estimation based on processing of sensor signals supported by artificial intelligence tools, technologies for remote monitoring, reporting and storage of BP data, and technologies for BP data interpretation and patient interaction designed to improve hypertension management ("digital therapeutics"). The number and volume of data relating to new devices/technologies is increasing rapidly and will continue to grow. This International Society of Hypertension position paper describes the new devices/technologies, presents evidence relating to new BP measurement techniques and related indices, highlights standard for the validation of new devices/technologies, discusses the reliability and utility of novel BP monitoring devices, the association of these metrics with clinical outcomes, and the use of digital therapeutics. It also highlights the challenges and evidence gaps that need to be overcome before these new technologies can be considered as a user-friendly and accurate source of novel BP data to inform clinical hypertension management strategies.
Accuracy of Automated Cuff Blood Pressure Monitors in Special Populations: International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Task Group Report and Call for Research

George S. S. Stergiou,Ariadni Menti,Kei Asayama,Alejandro de la Sierra,Jiguang Wang,Hiroyuki Kinoshita,Yukiya Sawanoi,Shingo Yamashita,Anastasios Kollias,Colin O. O. Wu,Tsutomu Ichikawa,Bruce Alpert

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000003403

IF: 4.9

2023-01-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:OBJECTIVE:Automated cuff blood pressure (BP) devices are widely used for ambulatory, home, and office BP measurement. However, an automated device, which is accurate in the general adult population may be inaccurate in some special populations. A 2018 Collaborative Statement by the US Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, the European Society of Hypertension, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) considered three special populations requiring separate validation (age <3 years, pregnancy, and atrial fibrillation). An ISO Task Group was appointed to identify evidence for additional special populations.METHOD:Evidence on potential special populations was identified from the STRIDE BP database, which performs systematic PubMed searches for published validation studies of automated cuff BP monitors. Devices that passed in a general population, but failed in potential special populations were identified.RESULTS:Of 338 publications (549 validations, 348 devices) in the STRIDE BP database, 29 publications (38 validations, 25 devices) involved 4 potential special populations: (i) age 12-18 years: 3 of 7 devices failed but passed in a general population; (ii) age more than 65 years: 1 of 11 devices failed but passed in a general population; (iii) diabetes type-2: 4 devices (all passed); (iv) chronic kidney disease: 2 of 7 devices failed but passed in a general population.CONCLUSION:Some evidence suggest that the automated cuff BP devices may have different accuracy in adolescents and in patients with chronic kidney disease than in the general population. More research is needed to confirm these findings and investigate other potential special populations.
Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressure

James E. Sharman,Eoin O'Brien,Bruce Alpert,Aletta E. Schutte,Christian Delles,Michael Hecht Olsen,Roland Asmar,Neil Atkins,Eduardo Barbosa,David Calhoun,Norm R. C. Campbell,John Chalmers,Ivor Benjamin,Garry Jennings,Stephane Laurent,Pierre Boutouyrie,Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo,Richard J. McManus,Anastasia S. Mihailidou,Pedro Ordunez,Raj Padwal,Paolo Palatini,Gianfranco Parati,Neil Poulter,Michael K. Rakotz,Clive Rosendorff,Francesca Saladini,Angelo Scuteri,Weimar Sebba Barroso,Myeong-Chan Cho,Ki-Chul Sung,Raymond R. Townsend,Ji-Guang Wang,Tine Willum Hansen,Gregory Wozniak,George Stergiou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26633/RPSP.2020.21

2020-01-01

Abstract:The Lancet Commission on Hypertension identified that a key action to address the worldwide burden of high blood pressure (BP) was to improve the quality of BP measurements by using BP devices that have been validated for accuracy. Currently, there are over 3 000 commercially available BP devices, but many do not have published data on accuracy testing according to established scientific standards. This problem is enabled through weak or absent regulations that allow clearance of devices for commercial use without formal validation. In addition, new BP technologies have emerged (e.g. cuffless sensors) for which there is no scientific consensus regarding BP measurement accuracy standards. Altogether, these issues contribute to the widespread availability of clinic and home BP devices with limited or uncertain accuracy, leading to inappropriate hypertension diagnosis, management and drug treatment on a global scale. The most significant problems relating to the accuracy of BP devices can be resolved by the regulatory requirement for mandatory independent validation of BP devices according to the universally-accepted International Organization for Standardization Standard. This is a primary recommendation for which there is an urgent international need. Other key recommendations are development of validation standards specifically for new BP technologies and online lists of accurate devices that are accessible to consumers and health professionals. Recommendations are aligned with WHO policies on medical devices and universal healthcare. Adherence to recommendations would increase the global availability of accurate BP devices and result in better diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, thus decreasing the worldwide burden from high BP.
Improving the Accuracy of Blood Pressure Measurement

George S. Stergiou,Roland Asmar,Martin G. Myers,Paolo Palatini,Gianfranco Parati,Andrew Shennan,Ji‐Guang Wang,Eoin O’Brien

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000001635

IF: 4.9

2018-01-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Introduction: The European Society of Hypertension (ESH) International Protocol (ESH-IP) for the validation of blood pressure (BP) measuring devices was published in 2002, with the main objective of simplifying the validation procedures, so that more BP monitors would be subjected to independent validation. This article provides an overview of the international impact of the ESH-IP and of the lessons learned from its use, to be able to justify further developments in validation protocols. Methods: A review of published (PubMed) validation studies from 2002 to 2017 was performed. Results: One hundred and seventy-seven validation studies using the ESH-IP, 59 using the British Hypertension Society protocol, 46 using the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) standard and 23 using the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard were identified. Lists of validated office–clinic, home and ambulatory BP monitors are provided. Of the ESH-IP studies, 93% tested oscillometric devices, 80% upper arm, 71% home, 25% office and 7% ambulatory monitors (some had more than one function). Conclusion: The original goal of the ESH-IP has been fulfilled in that in the last decade the number of published validation studies has more than doubled. It is now recognized that the provision of accurate devices would be best served by having a universal protocol. An international initiative has been put in place by AAMI, ESH and ISO experts aiming to reach consensus for a universal validation protocol to be accepted worldwide, which will allow a more thorough evaluation of the accuracy and performance of future BP monitors.
Automated 'oscillometric' blood pressure measuring devices: how they work and what they measure

James E Sharman,Isabella Tan,George S Stergiou,Carolina Lombardi,Francesca Saladini,Mark Butlin,Raj Padwal,Kei Asayama,Alberto Avolio,Tammy M Brady,Alan Murray,Gianfranco Parati

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41371-022-00693-x

Abstract:Automated 'oscillometric' blood pressure (BP) measuring devices (BPMDs) were developed in the 1970s to replace manual auscultatory BP measurement by mercury sphygmomanometer. Automated BPMDs that have passed accuracy testing versus a reference auscultatory sphygmomanometer using a scientifically accepted validation protocol are recommended for clinical use globally. Currently, there are many thousands of unique automated BPMDs manufactured by hundreds of companies, with each device using proprietary algorithms to estimate BP and using a method of operation that is largely unchanged since inception. Validated automated BPMDs provide similar BP values to those recorded using manual auscultation albeit with potential sources of error mostly associated with using empirical algorithms to derive BP from waveform pulsations. Much of the work to derive contemporary BP thresholds and treatment targets used to manage cardiovascular disease risk was obtained using automated BPMDs. While there is room for future refinement to improve accuracy for better individual risk stratification, validated BPMDs remain the recommended standard for office and out-of-office BP measurement to be used in hypertension diagnosis and management worldwide.
European Society of Hypertension Position Paper on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

Eoin O’Brien,Gianfranco Parati,George S. Stergiou,Roland Asmar,Laurie Beilin,Grzegorz Bilo,Denis Clément,Alejandro de la Sierra,Peter de Leeuw,Eamon Dolan,Robert Fagard,John W. Graves,Geoffrey A. Head,Yutaka Imai,Kazuomi Kario,Empar Lurbe,Jean-Michel Mallion,Giuseppe Mancia,Thomas Mengden,Martin G. Myers,Gbenga Ogedegbe,Takayoshi Ohkubo,Stefano Omboni,Paolo Palatini,Josep Redón,Luís M. Ruilope,Andrew Shennan,Jan A. Staessen,G VANMONTFRANS,Paolo Verdecchia,Bernard Waeber,Ji‐Guang Wang,Alberto Zanchetti,Yuqing Zhang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0b013e328363e964

IF: 4.9

2013-01-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) is being used increasingly in both clinical practice and hypertension research. Although there are many guidelines that emphasize the indications for ABPM, there is no comprehensive guideline dealing with all aspects of the technique. It was agreed at a consensus meeting on ABPM in Milan in 2011 that the 34 attendees should prepare a comprehensive position paper on the scientific evidence for ABPM. This position paper considers the historical background, the advantages and limitations of ABPM, the threshold levels for practice, and the cost–effectiveness of the technique. It examines the need for selecting an appropriate device, the accuracy of devices, the additional information and indices that ABPM devices may provide, and the software requirements. At a practical level, the paper details the requirements for using ABPM in clinical practice, editing considerations, the number of measurements required, and the circumstances, such as obesity and arrhythmias, when particular care needs to be taken when using ABPM. The clinical indications for ABPM, among which white-coat phenomena, masked hypertension, and nocturnal hypertension appear to be prominent, are outlined in detail along with special considerations that apply in certain clinical circumstances, such as childhood, the elderly and pregnancy, and in cardiovascular illness, examples being stroke and chronic renal disease, and the place of home measurement of blood pressure in relation to ABPM is appraised. The role of ABPM in research circumstances, such as pharmacological trials and in the prediction of outcome in epidemiological studies is examined and finally the implementation of ABPM in practice is considered in relation to the issue of reimbursement in different countries, the provision of the technique by primary care practices, hospital clinics and pharmacies, and the growing role of registries of ABPM in many countries.
Improving the accuracy of blood pressure measurement: the influence of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol (ESH-IP) for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices and future perspectives.

George S Stergiou,Roland Asmar,Martin Myers,Paolo Palatini,Gianfranco Parati,Andrew Shennan,Jiguang Wang,Eoin O'Brien

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000001635

IF: 4.9

2018-01-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Introduction: The European Society of Hypertension (ESH) International Protocol (ESH-IP) for the validation of blood pressure (BP) measuring devices was published in 2002, with the main objective of simplifying the validation procedures, so that more BP monitors would be subjected to independent validation. This article provides an overview of the international impact of the ESH-IP and of the lessons learned from its use, to be able to justify further developments in validation protocols. Methods: A review of published (PubMed) validation studies from 2002 to 2017 was performed. Results: One hundred and seventy-seven validation studies using the ESH-IP, 59 using the British Hypertension Society protocol, 46 using the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) standard and 23 using the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) standard were identified. Lists of validated office-clinic, home and ambulatory BP monitors are provided. Of the ESH-IP studies, 93% tested oscillometric devices, 80% upper arm, 71% home, 25% office and 7% ambulatory monitors (some had more than one function). Conclusion: The original goal of the ESH-IP has been fulfilled in that in the last decade the number of published validation studies has more than doubled. It is now recognized that the provision of accurate devices would be best served by having a universal protocol. An international initiative has been put in place by AAMI, ESH and ISO experts aiming to reach consensus for a universal validation protocol to be accepted worldwide, which will allow a more thorough evaluation of the accuracy and performance of future BP monitors.
Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Current Status and New Developments

Kazuomi Kario

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajh/hpab017

2021-02-09

American Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Abstract Home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) is a reliable, convenient, and less costly alternative to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Recognition and use of HBPM have dramatically increased over the last 20 years and current guidelines make strong recommendations for the use of both HBPM and ABPM in patients with hypertension. The accuracy and reliability of home blood pressure (BP) measurements require use of a validated device and standardized procedures, and good patient information and training. Key HBPM parameters include morning BP, evening BP, and the morning–evening difference. In addition, newer semi-automatic HBPM devices can also measure nighttime BP at fixed intervals during sleep. Advances in technology mean that HBPM devices could provide additional relevant data (e.g., environmental conditions) or determine BP in response to a specific trigger (e.g., hypoxia, increased heart rate). The value of HBPM is highlighted by a growing body of evidence showing that home BP is an important predictor of target organ damage, and cardiovascular disease (CVD)- and stroke-related morbidity and mortality, and provides better prognostic information than office BP. In addition, use of HBPM to monitor antihypertensive therapy can help to optimize reductions in BP, improve BP control, and reduce target organ damage and cardiovascular risk. Overall, HBPM should play a central role in the management of patients with hypertension, with the goal of identifying increased risk and predicting the onset of CVD events, allowing proactive interventions to reduce risk and eliminate adverse outcomes.

peripheral vascular disease
Validation Protocols for Blood Pressure Measuring Devices in the 21st Century.

George S Stergiou,Bruce S Alpert,Stephan Mieke,Jiguang Wang,Eoin O'Brien

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.13294

2018-01-01

Abstract:Blood pressure (BP) is a vital sign and the essential measurement for the diagnosis of hypertension. Therefore, its accurate measurement is a key element for the evaluation of many medical conditions and for the reliable diagnosis and efficient treatment of hypertension. In the last 3 decades prestigious organizations, such as the US Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI), the British Hypertension Society, the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring, and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO), have developed protocols for clinical validation of BP measuring devices. All these initiatives aim to standardize validation procedures and establish minimum accuracy standards for BP monitors. Unfortunately, only a few of the BP measuring devices available on the market have been subjected to independent validation using one of these protocols. Recently, the AAMI, ESH, and ISO experts agreed to develop a single universally acceptable standard (AAMI/ESH/ISO), which will replace all previous protocols. This major international initiative has been undertaken to best serve the needs of patients with hypertension, a public interested in cardiovascular health, practicing physicians, scientific researchers, regulatory bodies, and manufacturers. There is an urgent need to influence regulatory authorities throughout the world to make it mandatory for all BP measuring devices to have undergone independent validation before approval for marketing. Efforts need to be intensified to improve the accuracy of BP measuring devices, further optimize the validation procedure, and ensure that objective and unbiased validation data become available.
Accuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure

Dean S. Picone,Martin G. Schultz,Petr Otahal,Svend Aakhus,Ahmed M. Al-Jumaily,J. Andrew Black,Willem J. Bos,John B. Chambers,Chen-Huan Chen,Hao-Min Cheng,Antoine Cremer,Justin E. Davies,Nathan Dwyer,Brian A. Gould,Alun D. Hughes,Peter S. Lacy,Esben Laugesen,Fuyou Liang,Roman Melamed,Sandy Muecke,Nobuyuki Ohte,Sho Okada,Stefano Omboni,Christian Ott,Xiaoqing Peng,Telmo Pereira,Giacomo Pucci,Ronak Rajani,Philip Roberts-Thomson,Niklas B. Rossen,Daisuke Sueta,Manish D. Sinha,Roland E. Schmieder,Harold Smulyan,Velandai K. Srikanth,Ralph Stewart,George A. Stouffer,Kenji Takazawa,Jiguang Wang,Berend E. Westerhof,Franz Weber,Thomas Weber,Bryan Williams,Hirotsugu Yamada,Eiichiro Yamamoto,James E. Sharman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.064

IF: 24

2017-01-01

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract:Hypertension (HTN) is the single greatest cardiovascular risk factor worldwide. HTN management is usually guided by brachial cuff blood pressure (BP), but questions have been raised regarding accuracy. This comprehensive analysis determined the accuracy of cuff BP and the consequent effect on BP classification compared with intra-arterial BP reference standards. Three individual participant data meta-analyses were conducted among studies (from the 1950s to 2016) that measured intra-arterial aortic BP, intra-arterial brachial BP, and cuff BP. A total of 74 studies with 3,073 participants were included. Intra-arterial brachial systolic blood pressure (SBP) was higher than aortic values (8.0 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9 to 10.1 mm Hg; p < 0.0001) and intra-arterial brachial diastolic BP was lower than aortic values (−1.0 mm Hg; 95% CI: −2.0 to −0.1 mm Hg; p = 0.038). Cuff BP underestimated intra-arterial brachial SBP (−5.7 mm Hg; 95% CI: −8.0 to −3.5 mm Hg; p < 0.0001) but overestimated intra-arterial diastolic BP (5.5 mm Hg; 95% CI: 3.5 to 7.5 mm Hg; p < 0.0001). Cuff and intra-arterial aortic SBP showed a small mean difference (0.3 mm Hg; 95% CI: −1.5 to 2.1 mm Hg; p = 0.77) but poor agreement (mean absolute difference 8.0 mm Hg; 95% CI: 7.1 to 8.9 mm Hg). Concordance between BP classification using the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure cuff BP (normal, pre-HTN, and HTN stages 1 and 2) compared with intra-arterial brachial BP was 60%, 50%, 53%, and 80%, and using intra-arterial aortic BP was 79%, 57%, 52%, and 76%, respectively. Using revised intra-arterial thresholds based on cuff BP percentile rank, concordance between BP classification using cuff BP compared with intra-arterial brachial BP was 71%, 66%, 52%, and 76%, and using intra-arterial aortic BP was 74%, 61%, 56%, and 65%, respectively. Cuff BP has variable accuracy for measuring either brachial or aortic intra-arterial BP, and this adversely influences correct BP classification. These findings indicate that stronger accuracy standards for BP devices may improve cardiovascular risk management.
Validation of Non-Invasive Central Blood Pressure Devices: Artery Society Task Force (abridged) Consensus Statement on Protocol Standardization

James E. Sharman,Alberto P. Avolio,Johannes Baulmann,Athanase Benetos,Jacques Blacher,C. Leigh Blizzard,Pierre Boutouyrie,Chen-Huan Chen,Phil Chowienczyk,John R. Cockcroft,J. Kennedy Cruickshank,Isabel Ferreira,Lorenzo Ghiadoni,Alun Hughes,Piotr Jankowski,Stephane Laurent,Barry J. McDonnell,Carmel McEniery,Sandrine C. Millasseau,Theodoros G. Papaioannou,Gianfranco Parati,Jeong Bae Park,Athanase D. Protogerou,Mary J. Roman,Giuseppe Schillaci,Patrick Segers,George S. Stergiou,Hirofumi Tomiyama,Raymond R. Townsend,Luc M. Van Bortel,Jiguang Wang,Siegfried Wassertheurer,Thomas Weber,Ian B. Wilkinson,Charalambos Vlachopoulos

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.artres.2017.11.001

2017-01-01

Artery Research

Abstract:Brachial cuff blood pressure (BP) is clinically important, but may be an inaccurate substitute for central BP. Many non-invasive devices have been developed that purport to estimate central BP from peripheral artery sites, yet with no standardized guidelines; the accuracy testing of these new devices has not been undertaken in a uniform fashion with comparable protocols. This is an abridged paper describing the recommendations reached by an international task force convened to identify issues that need to be addressed and reach consensus relating to methods for assessing and reporting the accuracy (validation) of central BP devices. The recommendations are endorsed by the Association for Research into Arterial Structure and Physiology (ARTERY) Society, as well as the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Arterial Structure and Function, and the ESH Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability. Researchers interested in validating central BP monitors should read the full version of the statement.
Declaración De Posición Del Grupo De La Comisión Lancet De Hipertensión Con Respecto a La Mejora Mundial De Las Normas De Exactitud Para Los Dispositivos De Medición De La Presión Arterial

James E. Sharman,Eoin O’Brien,Bruce Alpert,Aletta E. Schutte,Christian Delles,Michael Hecht Olsen,Roland Asmar,Neil Atkins,Eduardo Barbosa,David Calhoun,Norm R.C. Campbell,John Chalmers,Ivor Benjamin,Garry Jennings,Stéphane Laurent,Pierre Boutouyrie,Patricio Lopez-Jaramillo,Richard J. McManus,Anastasia S. Mihailidou,Pedro Ordunez,Raj Padwal,Paolo Palatini,Gianfranco Parati,Neil Poulter,Michael K. Rakotz,Clive Rosendorff,Francesca Saladini,Angelo Scuteri,Weimar Sebba Barroso,Myeong-Chan Cho,Ki-Chul Sung,Raymond R. Townsend,Ji-Guang Wang,Tine Willum Hansen,Gregory Wozniak,George Stergiou

DOI: https://doi.org/10.26633/rpsp.2020.21

2020-01-01

Revista Panamericana de Salud Pública

Abstract:La Comisión Lancet de Hipertensión determinó que una medida clave para responder a la carga mundial que representa la hipertensión arterial era mejorar la calidad de las mediciones de la presión arterial, mediante la utilización de dispositivos cuya exactitud haya sido validada. En la actualidad existen 3000 dispositivos comercializados, pero muchos no tienen datos publicados sobre pruebas de exactitud conformes a las normas científicas establecidas. La falta de regulación o su ineficiencia, que permiten la autorización de dispositivos para uso comercial sin una validación oficial, posibilitan este problema. Además, han surgido tecnologías nuevas de medición de la presión arterial (por ejemplo, los sensores sin brazalete) sobre las cuales no existe unanimidad en la comunidad científica con respecto a las normas de exactitud de la medición. En conjunto, estos aspectos contribuyen a la disponibilidad generalizada de tensiómetros de consultorio o domiciliarios que ofrecen una exactitud limitada o incierta, que llevan a diagnósticos, manejo y farmacoterapia inapropiados de la hipertensión a escala mundial. Los problemas más importantes relacionados con la exactitud de los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial se pueden resolver mediante el requisito regulatorio de una validación independiente obligatoria de los dispositivos, en consonancia con la norma ISO universalmente aceptada. Esta es una recomendación básica y constituye una necesidad internacional acuciante. Otras recomendaciones clave son la elaboración de normas de validación específicas para las tecnologías nuevas de medición de la presión arterial y la publicación en línea de listas de los dispositivos nuevos exactos que están a la disposición de los usuarios y los profesionales de salud. Las recomendaciones están en consonancia con las políticas de la Organización Mundial de la Salud sobre los dispositivos médicos y la atención universal de la salud. El cumplimiento de las recomendaciones aumentará la disponibilidad mundial de dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial que sean exactos y tendrá como efecto un mejor diagnóstico y tratamiento, reduciendo así la carga mundial de la hipertensión.
Simultaneous 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement on both arms: a consideration for improving hypertension management

Tomas L Bothe,Reinhold Kreutz,Martin Glos,Andreas Patzak,Niklas Pilz

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000003632

2024-05-01

Abstract:Objective: Arterial hypertension is one of the common treatment goals in today's medicine. 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM) performed by oscillometric cuff-based devices is considered as the gold standard in hypertension diagnostics. This study aims at examining the measurement accuracy of a widely used, ABPM device. Methods: Fifty-two young and healthy participants underwent simultaneous 24-h ABPM on the left and the right upper arm using two Boso/A&D TM-2430 oscillometric cuff-based devices. Pressure curves of the cuffs, as well as hydrostatic pressure difference between the cuffs were recorded. Results: The mean differences between both simultaneous measurements were 1.16 mmHg with limits of agreement of 36.23 mmHg for SBP and 1.32 mmHg with limits of agreement of 32.65 mmHg for DBP. Excluding measurements where the pressure curves were disturbed and correcting for hydrostatic pressure difference between the cuffs, reduced the measurement error. However, limits of agreement remained around 20 mmHg. There were large differences in hypertension grading and dipping pattern classification between simultaneous measurements on the left and right arm. Conclusion: The cuff-based ABPM device reveals notable measurement uncertainties, influencing hypertension grading, dipping pattern classification and blood pressure variability. These effects are attributed in part to disturbances during cuff deflation and hydrostatic influences. Nonetheless, ABPM has shown its clinical values in several studies, while this study underscores its still unlocked potential to improve hypertension management.
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

Tomas Bothe,Tan Bui,Yueyang Bao,Niamh Chapman,James Sharman,Dean Picone

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0001063180.60156.92

IF: 4.9

2024-09-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Background and Objective: Advances in technology mean that accurate BP measurements can be automatically performed, allowing widescale use of BP measurement at home. Despite these advances, some health professionals and patients question the accuracy of devices that are designated for use at home compared to in-clinic BP devices. This study sought to determine if there were differences in the accuracy of home BP devices compared with in-clinic BP devices. Methods: A systematic review of BP measurement validation studies of automated, upper-arm devices in adults published between 1987-2023. Intended primary use of each device was extracted from the published validation study. A random effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate pooled mean BP differences across validation studies for home BP and in-clinic BP devices, compared to manual BP. Results: There were 210 home device, and 77 in-clinic device validation studies that met inclusion criteria. In comparison to manual systolic BP, the mean difference for home device systolic BP was 0.11 mmHg (95% CI: 0.09, 0.13), and the mean difference for in-clinic device systolic BP was 0.18 mmHg (95% CI: 0.16, 0.21). There was no significant difference in the accuracy of home vs. in-clinic systolic BP (p=0.88). In comparison to manual diastolic BP, the mean difference for home device diastolic BP was 0.15 mmHg (95% CI: 0.13, 0.17), and the mean difference for in-clinic device diastolic BP was -0.93 mmHg (95% CI: -0.96, -0.90). There was a small difference in the accuracy of home vs. in-clinic device diastolic BP (1.08 mmHg, 95%CI: 0.44, 1.72; p<0.01). Conclusion: There were no meaningful differences in accuracy between home BP devices and in-clinic BP devices, showing that any validated device will yield accurate BP results if used according to standardized measurement principles.

peripheral vascular disease
A Call to Regulate Manufacture and Marketing of Blood Pressure Devices and Cuffs: A Position Statement from the World Hypertension League, International Society of Hypertension and Supporting Hypertension Organizations

Norm R. C. Campbell,Mark Gelfer,George S. Stergiou,Bruce S. Alpert,Martin G. Myers,Michael K. Rakotz,Raj Padwal,Aletta Elisabeth Schutte,Eoin O'Brien,Daniel T. Lackland,Mark L. Niebylski,Peter M. Nilsson,Kimbree A. Redburn,Xin-Hua Zhang,Louise Burrell,Masatsugu Horiuchi,Neil R. Poulter,Dorairaj Prabhakaran,Agustin J. Ramirez,Ernesto L. Schiffrin,Rhian M. Touyz,Ji-Guang Wang,Michael A. Weber

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jch.12782

2016-01-01

Abstract:Nearly all automated blood pressure (BP) measurement devices assess BP by the oscillometric technique.1, 2 Oscillometric BP readings are derived by measuring the maximal oscillations of the composite pulse wave in the BP cuff, which corresponds to the mean arterial pressure. Systolic and diastolic BP are then estimated by points along the composite pulse wave, using an algorithm that is proprietary to each manufacturer and device. Hence, there is a need to ensure that the estimated BP by automated oscillometric devices reflects BP measured by auscultation. A few automated devices use auscultation to assess Korotkoff sounds by using a microphone.2 Microphones may capture different sound wave lengths and sound intensity than the human ear and there is a potential for sound artifacts to be recorded by automated devices as Korotkoff sounds. Therefore, automated devices that operate using microphones to assess Korotkoff sounds also require an assessment of their ability to estimate BP accurately. An international validation standard and several protocols have been developed to test the ability of automated devices to assess BP accurately in the general public, as well as in special populations, such as children or pregnant women, and special conditions such as arrhythmias.1,3-7 Factors that need to be considered for validation include microphone sensitivity, cuff size, appropriate algorithms, and the reliability and reproducibility of BP readings. Many manufacturers have developed devices that have been rigorously tested by independent investigators by using one or more of these test procedures. Scientists, clinicians, and the public can be reassured that these devices are likely to be accurate in the populations tested. Other devices have been tested independently but the test results were not published. Many government approval agencies do not require independent validation of accuracy according to established validation standards/protocols as mentioned above; rather, they rely only on the manufacturers to show that they have done accuracy tests internally. Furthermore, some validation testing may not include enough people with a wide range of arm sizes to ensure accurate readings in people with small or large arm sizes.8 Thus, many devices currently available on the market for self-monitoring of BP at home or for professional use in the office or hospital have: (1) not been tested independently according to the international standard or a national protocol; (2) have failed independent validation studies; or (3) may not produce accurate readings in those with small or large arms but are still marketed.2 The accuracy of these devices is not assured, and, for devices that fail validation standards, inaccurate BP readings and thereby incorrect treatment decisions are likely. The manufacture and sale of BP measurement cuffs are also problematic. The issues apply not only to automated but also manual auscultatory devices. With the exception of cuffs that automatically adjust for a wide range of arm sizes,9, 10 an accurate BP assessment requires the selection of an appropriate cuff size according to the individual's arm circumference.11 In general, this requires cuffs to be marked with the range of arm circumferences on which the cuff will be able to be used to assess BP accurately. However, some cuffs are not marked, and some may be inaccurately marked. Further, claims that "one size cuff fits all" may not have been validated in studies that had patients with a wide range of arm sizes. Clinicians can manually mark cuffs for the range of arm sizes on which they are likely to be accurate and can also manually assess individual arm circumferences to see what cuff would be proper. Unfortunately, these procedures are time-consuming and rarely done in clinical practice. Ensuring that all BP cuffs, when manufactured, are accurately marked for the range of arm sizes to be used for accurate BP assessment is a crucial and simple step for resolving this problem. Ensuring that the devices have a wide range of cuff sizes and that the devices are validated with the range of cuffs sizes available is also important. Notwithstanding the relevant issues regarding arm sizes, the use of wrist devices to assess BP is becoming more popular. This is likely attributable to ease of use (eg, namely, no need to measure arm circumferences), cost, and usability in obese individuals with cone-shaped upper arms. There are, however, several challenges when using these devices, including that the wrist be held at heart level—an aspect that is not adhered to in many instances. Furthermore, a large proportion of these low-cost devices are not validated according to the described procedures, and, as a rule, are generally not advised to be used as a first option because of overestimation or underestimation of BP. Dr Mark Niebylski and Kimbree Redburn are paid WHL consultants but report no other conflicts. Dr Ji-Guang Wang reports receiving research grants and consulting fees from several BP measuring device companies including A&D, AVITA, Honsun, Omron, and Rossmax but reports no other conflicts. Dr Michael Weber is a consultant for and received travel support from Omron but reports no other conflicts. All other primary authors including those from WHL and the ISH report no conflicts of interest.
Accuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

Dean S Picone,Martin G Schultz,Petr Otahal,Svend Aakhus,Ahmed M Al-Jumaily,J Andrew Black,Willem J Bos,John B Chambers,Chen-Huan Chen,Hao-Min Cheng,Antoine Cremer,Justin E Davies,Nathan Dwyer,Brian A Gould,Alun D Hughes,Peter S Lacy,Esben Laugesen,Fuyou Liang,Roman Melamed,Sandy Muecke,Nobuyuki Ohte,Sho Okada,Stefano Omboni,Christian Ott,Xiaoqing Peng,Telmo Pereira,Giacomo Pucci,Ronak Rajani,Philip Roberts-Thomson,Niklas B Rossen,Daisuke Sueta,Manish D Sinha,Roland E Schmieder,Harold Smulyan,Velandai K Srikanth,Ralph Stewart,George A Stouffer,Kenji Takazawa,Jiguang Wang,Berend E Westerhof,Franz Weber,Thomas Weber,Bryan Williams,Hirotsugu Yamada,Eiichiro Yamamoto,James E Sharman

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jacc.2017.05.064

IF: 24

2017-01-01

Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract:BACKGROUND:Hypertension (HTN) is the single greatest cardiovascular risk factor worldwide. HTN management is usually guided by brachial cuff blood pressure (BP), but questions have been raised regarding accuracy. OBJECTIVES:This comprehensive analysis determined the accuracy of cuff BP and the consequent effect on BP classification compared with intra-arterial BP reference standards. METHODS:Three individual participant data meta-analyses were conducted among studies (from the 1950s to 2016) that measured intra-arterial aortic BP, intra-arterial brachial BP, and cuff BP. RESULTS:A total of 74 studies with 3,073 participants were included. Intra-arterial brachial systolic blood pressure (SBP) was higher than aortic values (8.0 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.9 to 10.1 mm Hg; p < 0.0001) and intra-arterial brachial diastolic BP was lower than aortic values (-1.0 mm Hg; 95% CI: -2.0 to -0.1 mm Hg; p = 0.038). Cuff BP underestimated intra-arterial brachial SBP (-5.7 mm Hg; 95% CI: -8.0 to -3.5 mm Hg; p < 0.0001) but overestimated intra-arterial diastolic BP (5.5 mm Hg; 95% CI: 3.5 to 7.5 mm Hg; p < 0.0001). Cuff and intra-arterial aortic SBP showed a small mean difference (0.3 mm Hg; 95% CI: -1.5 to 2.1 mm Hg; p = 0.77) but poor agreement (mean absolute difference 8.0 mm Hg; 95% CI: 7.1 to 8.9 mm Hg). Concordance between BP classification using the Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Pressure cuff BP (normal, pre-HTN, and HTN stages 1 and 2) compared with intra-arterial brachial BP was 60%, 50%, 53%, and 80%, and using intra-arterial aortic BP was 79%, 57%, 52%, and 76%, respectively. Using revised intra-arterial thresholds based on cuff BP percentile rank, concordance between BP classification using cuff BP compared with intra-arterial brachial BP was 71%, 66%, 52%, and 76%, and using intra-arterial aortic BP was 74%, 61%, 56%, and 65%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS:Cuff BP has variable accuracy for measuring either brachial or aortic intra-arterial BP, and this adversely influences correct BP classification. These findings indicate that stronger accuracy standards for BP devices may improve cardiovascular risk management.
White-coat Hypertension on Automated Blood Pressure Measurement: Implications for Clinical Practice

José Boggia,Tine W. Hansen,Kei Asayama,Leonella Luzardo,Yan Li,Jan A. Staessen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5083/ejcm.20424884.49

2011-01-01

Abstract:In 2002, Thomas G. Pickering wrote, ‘the addition of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring to conventional clinic measurement for defining blood pressure (BP) status in clinical practice has added a new complexity to the process, because the separation of normotension and hypertension can be assessed independently by each of the two methods’[1]. The two groups of patients that arise from this classification and require special attention are individuals with white-coat hypertension and those with masked hypertension. Self measurement of BP at home is increasingly becoming an alternative to ambulatory blood pressure monitoring. The 2007 European Guidelines recommend the same threshold for daytime ambulatory BP monitoring and self measurement of blood pressure (135/85 mmHg).
Accuracy of Automated Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitors in the Detection of Cardiac Arrhythmias

Qi‐Fang Huang,Sheng,Yi Zhang,Jie Wang,Yan Li,Ji‐Guang Wang

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/mbp.0b013e32832a40a5

2009-01-01

Blood Pressure Monitoring

Abstract:Huang, Qi-Fang; Sheng, Chang-Sheng; Zhang, Yi; Wang, Jie; Li, Yan; Wang, Ji-Guang Author Information
Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for Validation of Blood Pressure Measuring Devices in Adults.

George S. Stergiou,Gianfranco Parati,Charalambos Vlachopoulos,Apostolos Achimastos,Emanouel Andreadis,Roland Asmar,Alberto Avolio,Athanase Benetos,Grzegorz Bilo,Nadia Boubouchairopoulou,Pierre Boutouyrie,Paolo Castiglioni,Alejandro de la Sierra,Eamon Dolan,Geoffrey Head,Yutaka Imai,Kazuomi Kario,Anastasios Kollias,Vasilis Kotsis,Efstathios Manios,Richard McManus,Thomas Mengden,Anastasia Mihailidou,Martin Myers,Teemu Niiranen,Juan Eugenio Ochoa,Takayoshi Ohkubo,Stefano Omboni,Paul Padfield,Paolo Palatini,Theodore Papaioannou,Athanasios Protogerou,Josep Redon,Paolo Verdecchia,Jiguang Wang,Alberto Zanchetti,Giuseppe Mancia,Eoin O'Brien

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/hjh.0000000000002341

IF: 4.9

2020-01-01

Journal of Hypertension

Abstract:Office blood pressure measurement has been the basis for hypertension evaluation for almost a century. However, the evaluation of blood pressure out of the office using ambulatory or self-home monitoring is now strongly recommended for the accurate diagnosis in many, if not all, cases with suspected hypertension. Moreover, there is evidence that the variability of blood pressure might offer prognostic information that is independent of the average blood pressure level. Recently, advancement in technology has provided noninvasive evaluation of central (aortic) blood pressure, which might have attributes that are additive to the conventional brachial blood pressure measurement. This position statement, developed by international experts, deals with key research and practical issues in regard to peripheral blood pressure measurement (office, home, and ambulatory), blood pressure variability, and central blood pressure measurement. The objective is to present current achievements, identify gaps in knowledge and issues concerning clinical application, and present relevant research questions and directions to investigators and manufacturers for future research and development (primary goal).
History and evolution of blood pressure measurement

Su A Noh,Hwang-Soo Kim,Si-Hyuck Kang,Chang-Hwan Yoon,Tae-Jin Youn,In-Ho Chae

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40885-024-00268-7

2024-04-01

Abstract:Hypertension is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality worldwide. Hypertension mostly accompanies no symptoms, and therefore blood pressure (BP) measurement is the only way for early recognition and timely treatment. Methods for BP measurement have a long history of development and improvement. Invasive method via arterial cannulation was first proven possible in the 1800's. Subsequent scientific progress led to the development of the auscultatory method, also known as Korotkoff' sound, and the oscillometric method, which enabled clinically available BP measurement. However, hypertension management status is still poor. Globally, less than half of adults are aware of their hypertension diagnosis, and only one-third of them being treated are under control. Novel methods are actively investigated thanks to technological advances such as sensors and machine learning in addition to the clinical needs for easier and more convenient BP measurement. Each method adopts different technologies with its own specific advantages and disadvantages. Promises of novel methods include comprehensive information on out-of-office BP capturing dynamic short-term and long-term fluctuations. However, there are still pitfalls such as the need for regular calibration since most novel methods capture relative BP changes rather than an absolute value. In addition, there is growing concern on their accuracy and precision as conventional validation protocols are inappropriate for cuffless continuous methods. In this article, we provide a comprehensive overview of the past and present of BP measurement methods. Novel and emerging technologies are also introduced with respect to their potential applications and limitations.

Journal of Human Hypertension special issue on the accuracy of automated blood pressure measuring devices

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

Accuracy of Automated Cuff Blood Pressure Monitors in Special Populations: International Organization for Standardization (ISO) Task Group Report and Call for Research

Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressure

Improving the Accuracy of Blood Pressure Measurement

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

European Society of Hypertension Position Paper on Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring

Improving the accuracy of blood pressure measurement: the influence of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol (ESH-IP) for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices and future perspectives.

Home Blood Pressure Monitoring: Current Status and New Developments

Validation Protocols for Blood Pressure Measuring Devices in the 21st Century.

Accuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure

Validation of Non-Invasive Central Blood Pressure Devices: Artery Society Task Force (abridged) Consensus Statement on Protocol Standardization

Declaración De Posición Del Grupo De La Comisión Lancet De Hipertensión Con Respecto a La Mejora Mundial De Las Normas De Exactitud Para Los Dispositivos De Medición De La Presión Arterial

Simultaneous 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement on both arms: a consideration for improving hypertension management

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

A Call to Regulate Manufacture and Marketing of Blood Pressure Devices and Cuffs: A Position Statement from the World Hypertension League, International Society of Hypertension and Supporting Hypertension Organizations

Accuracy of Cuff-Measured Blood Pressure: Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses.

White-coat Hypertension on Automated Blood Pressure Measurement: Implications for Clinical Practice

Accuracy of Automated Oscillometric Blood Pressure Monitors in the Detection of Cardiac Arrhythmias

Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring of the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol for Validation of Blood Pressure Measuring Devices in Adults.

History and evolution of blood pressure measurement