Criteria for a suitable reference cuff for validation studies of blood pressure measuring devices in people with arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm.
Paolo Palatini, Claudio Fania, Elisabetta Benetti, Francesca Saladini, Francesca Battista, Andrea Ermolao
{"title":"Criteria for a suitable reference cuff for validation studies of blood pressure measuring devices in people with arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm.","authors":"Paolo Palatini, Claudio Fania, Elisabetta Benetti, Francesca Saladini, Francesca Battista, Andrea Ermolao","doi":"10.1097/MBP.0000000000000630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Recommendations about the dimensions of the reference cuff for device validations in people with arm size >42 cm are still unavailable. The aim of this study was to identify the criteria for an appropriate reference cuff for validation studies in people with upper arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In 20 adults with upper arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm (X-large group), 34 subjects with arm circumference between 37 and 42 cm and 78 subjects with arm circumference <37 cm cylindrical and tronco-conical cuffs were compared. In all participants, the pressure transmitted to the arm under the two cuffs was measured using a paper-thin pressure sensor.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In the X-large group, all participants had an arm slant angle <86.0°. In this group, the difference between the pressure detected on the arm surface with the sensor using the cylindrical versus the tronco-conical cuff (13.5 mmHg) was larger than in the group with an arm circumference of 37-to 42 cm and the group with a circumference <37 cm (3.7 and 0.6 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.001 versus both). In the whole sample, the between-cuff pressure difference was proportional to the conical shape of the arm ( P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These data suggest that in people with arm size between 43 and 50 cm the reference cuff for validation studies should have a conical shape with an 84-85° slant angle. To comply with current guidelines, an 18.5 × 37.0 cm bladder should be used which would allow proper cuffing in the large majority of subjects.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/MBP.0000000000000630","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: Recommendations about the dimensions of the reference cuff for device validations in people with arm size >42 cm are still unavailable. The aim of this study was to identify the criteria for an appropriate reference cuff for validation studies in people with upper arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm.
Methods: In 20 adults with upper arm circumference between 43 and 50 cm (X-large group), 34 subjects with arm circumference between 37 and 42 cm and 78 subjects with arm circumference <37 cm cylindrical and tronco-conical cuffs were compared. In all participants, the pressure transmitted to the arm under the two cuffs was measured using a paper-thin pressure sensor.
Results: In the X-large group, all participants had an arm slant angle <86.0°. In this group, the difference between the pressure detected on the arm surface with the sensor using the cylindrical versus the tronco-conical cuff (13.5 mmHg) was larger than in the group with an arm circumference of 37-to 42 cm and the group with a circumference <37 cm (3.7 and 0.6 mmHg, respectively, P < 0.001 versus both). In the whole sample, the between-cuff pressure difference was proportional to the conical shape of the arm ( P < 0.001).
Conclusions: These data suggest that in people with arm size between 43 and 50 cm the reference cuff for validation studies should have a conical shape with an 84-85° slant angle. To comply with current guidelines, an 18.5 × 37.0 cm bladder should be used which would allow proper cuffing in the large majority of subjects.
期刊介绍:
Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance.
Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.