Estefanie Siqueira Vigato de Oliveira, Nila Larisse Silva de Albuquerque, Priscila Rangel Dordetto, José Luiz Tatagiba Lamas
{"title":"通用标准是否接受之前经过验证的血压自我测量设备?系统回顾。","authors":"Estefanie Siqueira Vigato de Oliveira, Nila Larisse Silva de Albuquerque, Priscila Rangel Dordetto, José Luiz Tatagiba Lamas","doi":"10.1097/HJH.0000000000003859","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study aimed to analyze whether oscillometric blood pressure devices validated for the general population may be considered approved under Universal Standard criteria. A systematic review was conducted, with searches in nine databases, up to September 2023, including 32 validation studies of noninvasive arm cuff devices for self-measurement. The British Hypertension Society protocol was most common (68%), followed by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (40%). Most devices met Universal Standard criterion 1, but only 17 (53%) met criterion 2. Few studies contained details about the choice of cuffs, the number of participants by arm circumference, or the differences between methods by cuff subgroup. Due to the considerable differences between validation protocols, 53% of the devices analyzed were approved under the Universal Standard. The study contributes to expanding the validated pool of self-measurement devices under the Universal Standard.</p>","PeriodicalId":16043,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Hypertension","volume":" ","pages":"35-47"},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are previously validated blood pressure self-measurement devices accepted under the Universal Standard? A systematic review.\",\"authors\":\"Estefanie Siqueira Vigato de Oliveira, Nila Larisse Silva de Albuquerque, Priscila Rangel Dordetto, José Luiz Tatagiba Lamas\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/HJH.0000000000003859\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>This study aimed to analyze whether oscillometric blood pressure devices validated for the general population may be considered approved under Universal Standard criteria. A systematic review was conducted, with searches in nine databases, up to September 2023, including 32 validation studies of noninvasive arm cuff devices for self-measurement. The British Hypertension Society protocol was most common (68%), followed by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (40%). Most devices met Universal Standard criterion 1, but only 17 (53%) met criterion 2. Few studies contained details about the choice of cuffs, the number of participants by arm circumference, or the differences between methods by cuff subgroup. Due to the considerable differences between validation protocols, 53% of the devices analyzed were approved under the Universal Standard. The study contributes to expanding the validated pool of self-measurement devices under the Universal Standard.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16043,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Hypertension\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"35-47\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Hypertension\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000003859\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/26 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Hypertension","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/HJH.0000000000003859","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
Are previously validated blood pressure self-measurement devices accepted under the Universal Standard? A systematic review.
This study aimed to analyze whether oscillometric blood pressure devices validated for the general population may be considered approved under Universal Standard criteria. A systematic review was conducted, with searches in nine databases, up to September 2023, including 32 validation studies of noninvasive arm cuff devices for self-measurement. The British Hypertension Society protocol was most common (68%), followed by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (40%). Most devices met Universal Standard criterion 1, but only 17 (53%) met criterion 2. Few studies contained details about the choice of cuffs, the number of participants by arm circumference, or the differences between methods by cuff subgroup. Due to the considerable differences between validation protocols, 53% of the devices analyzed were approved under the Universal Standard. The study contributes to expanding the validated pool of self-measurement devices under the Universal Standard.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Hypertension publishes papers reporting original clinical and experimental research which are of a high standard and which contribute to the advancement of knowledge in the field of hypertension. The Journal publishes full papers, reviews or editorials (normally by invitation), and correspondence.