It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Repeated blood pressure (BP) measurements allow better control of hypertension. Current measurements rely on cuff-based devices. The aim of the present study was to compare BP measurements using a novel cuff-less photoplethysmography-based device to a standard sphygmomanometer device. Males and females were recruited from within the general population who arrived at a public BP screening station. One to two measurements were taken from each using a sphygmomanometer-based and the photoplethysmography-based devices. Devices were considered equal if the mean difference between paired measurements was below 5 mmHg and the Standard Deviation (SD) was no greater than 8 mmHg. Agreement and reliability analyses were also performed. 1057 subjects were included in the study analysis. There were no adverse events during the study. The mean (± SD) difference between paired measurements for all subjects was -0.1 ± 3.6 mmHg for the systolic and 0.0 ± 3.5 mmHg for the diastolic readings. We found 96.31% agreement in identifying hypertension and an Interclass Correlation Coefficient of 0.99 and 0.97 for systolic and diastolic measurements, respectively. The photoplethysmography-based device was found similar to the gold-standard sphygmomanometer-based device with high agreement and reliability levels. The device might enable a reliable, more convenient method for repeated BP monitoring.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israel Defense Force Medical Corps, Institute for Research in Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel (GRID:grid.9619.7) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0538); Hadassah Ein Kerem Medical Center, Heart Institute, Jerusalem, Israel (GRID:grid.17788.31) (ISNI:0000 0001 2221 2926)
2 Tel-Aviv University, Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, School of Public Health, Sackler Faculty of Medicine, and Sylvan Adams Sports Institute, Tel-Aviv, Israel (GRID:grid.12136.37) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0546)
3 The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israel Defense Force Medical Corps, Institute for Research in Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel (GRID:grid.9619.7) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0538)
4 Biobeat Technologies LTD, Petah Tikva, Israel (GRID:grid.9619.7)
5 The Technion, Obstetrics and Gynecology Department, Hillel Yaffe Medical Center and The Rappaport Faculty of Medicine, Haifa, Israel (GRID:grid.6451.6) (ISNI:0000000121102151)
6 Magen David Adom, Israel National Emergency Medical Services, Kiryat Ono, Israel (GRID:grid.425389.1) (ISNI:0000 0001 2188 5432)
7 The Hebrew University of Jerusalem and the Israel Defense Force Medical Corps, Institute for Research in Military Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Jerusalem, Israel (GRID:grid.9619.7) (ISNI:0000 0004 1937 0538); Biobeat Technologies LTD, Petah Tikva, Israel (GRID:grid.9619.7)