{"title":"Wearable cuffless blood pressure tracking: when will they be good enough?","authors":"Aletta E. Schutte","doi":"10.1038/s41371-024-00932-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Wearable health monitoring is a multibillion-dollar industry. But the holy grail is probably getting it right for blood pressure monitoring without a cuff, because raised blood pressure is very common and the leading cause of death in the world. Many have tried and failed, but industry is persisting: numerous cuffless wearable blood pressure devices are on the market, several technologies have been developed, hundreds of patents are registered every year, and some devices already have regulatory approval. However, to convince the die-hard blood pressure critic is a different ball game. To understand the challenges of currently accepted methods and cuffless devices, I performed a 24-h blood pressure monitoring self-test, including measurements when awake, asleep and watching an intense match of the Rugby World Cup final, with the purpose to demonstrate the challenges and opportunities we face. Blood pressure was monitored using five different devices simultaneously: validated left and right arm cuff blood pressure, and three cuffless wearable devices (wrist-band, chest patch and a ring). Whilst none of these devices proved to be perfect in capturing a physiologically challenging measure, namely blood pressure, it emphasised that our current practice of a single blood pressure measurement in clinical practice should be revisited. It further begs the question of when cuffless measurements will be good enough to incorporate in clinical decision-making.","PeriodicalId":16070,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Human Hypertension","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41371-024-00932-3.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Human Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.nature.com/articles/s41371-024-00932-3","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Wearable health monitoring is a multibillion-dollar industry. But the holy grail is probably getting it right for blood pressure monitoring without a cuff, because raised blood pressure is very common and the leading cause of death in the world. Many have tried and failed, but industry is persisting: numerous cuffless wearable blood pressure devices are on the market, several technologies have been developed, hundreds of patents are registered every year, and some devices already have regulatory approval. However, to convince the die-hard blood pressure critic is a different ball game. To understand the challenges of currently accepted methods and cuffless devices, I performed a 24-h blood pressure monitoring self-test, including measurements when awake, asleep and watching an intense match of the Rugby World Cup final, with the purpose to demonstrate the challenges and opportunities we face. Blood pressure was monitored using five different devices simultaneously: validated left and right arm cuff blood pressure, and three cuffless wearable devices (wrist-band, chest patch and a ring). Whilst none of these devices proved to be perfect in capturing a physiologically challenging measure, namely blood pressure, it emphasised that our current practice of a single blood pressure measurement in clinical practice should be revisited. It further begs the question of when cuffless measurements will be good enough to incorporate in clinical decision-making.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Human Hypertension is published monthly and is of interest to health care professionals who deal with hypertension (specialists, internists, primary care physicians) and public health workers. We believe that our patients benefit from robust scientific data that are based on well conducted clinical trials. We also believe that basic sciences are the foundations on which we build our knowledge of clinical conditions and their management. Towards this end, although we are primarily a clinical based journal, we also welcome suitable basic sciences studies that promote our understanding of human hypertension.
The journal aims to perform the dual role of increasing knowledge in the field of high blood pressure as well as improving the standard of care of patients. The editors will consider for publication all suitable papers dealing directly or indirectly with clinical aspects of hypertension, including but not limited to epidemiology, pathophysiology, therapeutics and basic sciences involving human subjects or tissues. We also consider papers from all specialties such as ophthalmology, cardiology, nephrology, obstetrics and stroke medicine that deal with the various aspects of hypertension and its complications.