Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?

OBJECTIVE: In laboring women a consistent difference has become evident between measurements obtained with an automated blood pressure device and those obtained with the auscultatory method. A prospective study was designed to assess the concordance of these two methods. STUDY DESIGN: Three sets of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:American journal of obstetrics and gynecology 1993-03, Vol.168 (3), p.796-798
Hauptverfasser: Marx, Gertie F., Schwalbe, Steven S., Cho, Elvira, Whitty, Janice E.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 798
container_issue 3
container_start_page 796
container_title American journal of obstetrics and gynecology
container_volume 168
creator Marx, Gertie F.
Schwalbe, Steven S.
Cho, Elvira
Whitty, Janice E.
description OBJECTIVE: In laboring women a consistent difference has become evident between measurements obtained with an automated blood pressure device and those obtained with the auscultatory method. A prospective study was designed to assess the concordance of these two methods. STUDY DESIGN: Three sets of brachial blood pressure measurements were made by both oscillatory and auscultatory techniques in 30 women in labor, 20 term pregnant women not in labor, and 20 nonpregnant volunteers. RESULTS: In the non laboring women and the nonpregnant controls there was satisfactory agreement between the results of the two methods of measurement. In the parturients systolic pressures were consistently and significantly higher and diastolic pressures consistently and significantly lower with the oscillatory compared with the auscultatory method, but mean arterial pressures were not different. CONCLUSION: In laboring women there is a discrepancy between systolic and diastolic pressures obtained by the auscultatory versus the oscillatory method of measurement, although mean pressures are not significantly different. We suggest that during labor the diagnoses of hypertension and hypotension be based on the mean rather than the systolic or diastolic pressure.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/S0002-9378(12)90822-4
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_75641649</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0002937812908224</els_id><sourcerecordid>75641649</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-9b2b1a58a9405704a2fd2347d16b8d68c7c70f7e1ff43aa9a6f2bf3cae8b34e03</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhq2qqCylP6FSDqiCQ8B2HH_0Uq0qvkQlDtCzNXbGxSiJFzsp6r8nYVd77enVeJ7xjB5CLhl9zyiTH35QSnltGqXfMv7OUM15LU7IhlGjaqmlPiWbI_KSvCrl91pyw8_ImRat1JpvyLftPKUBJuwq16fUVbuMpcwZqwFhzQHHqVRxrHpwKcfxofqblrfrarsw0y98qjL2EVyPN6_JiwB9wYtDnpP7Tx9_3n6p775__nq7vat9o81UG8cdg1aDEbRVVAAPHW-E6ph0upPaK69oUMhCEA2AARm4C40H1K4RSJtzcrX_d5fTnxnLZIdYPPY9jJjmYlUrBZPCLGC7B31OpWQMdpfjAPnJMmpXifa_RLsasmzJVaIVy9zlYcHsBuyOUwdrS__NoQ_FQx8yjD6WIyaU5kqrBbvZY7jIeIyYbfERR49dzOgn26X4zCH_AGV_jnY</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>75641649</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Marx, Gertie F. ; Schwalbe, Steven S. ; Cho, Elvira ; Whitty, Janice E.</creator><creatorcontrib>Marx, Gertie F. ; Schwalbe, Steven S. ; Cho, Elvira ; Whitty, Janice E.</creatorcontrib><description>OBJECTIVE: In laboring women a consistent difference has become evident between measurements obtained with an automated blood pressure device and those obtained with the auscultatory method. A prospective study was designed to assess the concordance of these two methods. STUDY DESIGN: Three sets of brachial blood pressure measurements were made by both oscillatory and auscultatory techniques in 30 women in labor, 20 term pregnant women not in labor, and 20 nonpregnant volunteers. RESULTS: In the non laboring women and the nonpregnant controls there was satisfactory agreement between the results of the two methods of measurement. In the parturients systolic pressures were consistently and significantly higher and diastolic pressures consistently and significantly lower with the oscillatory compared with the auscultatory method, but mean arterial pressures were not different. CONCLUSION: In laboring women there is a discrepancy between systolic and diastolic pressures obtained by the auscultatory versus the oscillatory method of measurement, although mean pressures are not significantly different. We suggest that during labor the diagnoses of hypertension and hypotension be based on the mean rather than the systolic or diastolic pressure.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9378</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1097-6868</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/S0002-9378(12)90822-4</identifier><identifier>PMID: 8456882</identifier><identifier>CODEN: AJOGAH</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Philadelphia, PA: Mosby, Inc</publisher><subject>Auscultation ; Automation ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood Pressure Determination - methods ; Blood Pressure Determination - standards ; Blood pressure in parturients: auscultatory vs oscillatory method ; Delivery. Postpartum. Lactation ; Female ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Labor, Obstetric - physiology ; Maternal, fetal and perinatal monitoring ; Medical sciences ; obstetric anesthesia ; Oscillometry ; Pregnancy ; pregnancy-induced hypertension</subject><ispartof>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 1993-03, Vol.168 (3), p.796-798</ispartof><rights>1993 Mosby</rights><rights>1993 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-9b2b1a58a9405704a2fd2347d16b8d68c7c70f7e1ff43aa9a6f2bf3cae8b34e03</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-9b2b1a58a9405704a2fd2347d16b8d68c7c70f7e1ff43aa9a6f2bf3cae8b34e03</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002937812908224$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27903,27904,65309</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=4782787$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8456882$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Marx, Gertie F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwalbe, Steven S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Elvira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitty, Janice E.</creatorcontrib><title>Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?</title><title>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</title><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><description>OBJECTIVE: In laboring women a consistent difference has become evident between measurements obtained with an automated blood pressure device and those obtained with the auscultatory method. A prospective study was designed to assess the concordance of these two methods. STUDY DESIGN: Three sets of brachial blood pressure measurements were made by both oscillatory and auscultatory techniques in 30 women in labor, 20 term pregnant women not in labor, and 20 nonpregnant volunteers. RESULTS: In the non laboring women and the nonpregnant controls there was satisfactory agreement between the results of the two methods of measurement. In the parturients systolic pressures were consistently and significantly higher and diastolic pressures consistently and significantly lower with the oscillatory compared with the auscultatory method, but mean arterial pressures were not different. CONCLUSION: In laboring women there is a discrepancy between systolic and diastolic pressures obtained by the auscultatory versus the oscillatory method of measurement, although mean pressures are not significantly different. We suggest that during labor the diagnoses of hypertension and hypotension be based on the mean rather than the systolic or diastolic pressure.</description><subject>Auscultation</subject><subject>Automation</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Determination - methods</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Determination - standards</subject><subject>Blood pressure in parturients: auscultatory vs oscillatory method</subject><subject>Delivery. Postpartum. Lactation</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Labor, Obstetric - physiology</subject><subject>Maternal, fetal and perinatal monitoring</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>obstetric anesthesia</subject><subject>Oscillometry</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>pregnancy-induced hypertension</subject><issn>0002-9378</issn><issn>1097-6868</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1993</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkE1v1DAQhq2qqCylP6FSDqiCQ8B2HH_0Uq0qvkQlDtCzNXbGxSiJFzsp6r8nYVd77enVeJ7xjB5CLhl9zyiTH35QSnltGqXfMv7OUM15LU7IhlGjaqmlPiWbI_KSvCrl91pyw8_ImRat1JpvyLftPKUBJuwq16fUVbuMpcwZqwFhzQHHqVRxrHpwKcfxofqblrfrarsw0y98qjL2EVyPN6_JiwB9wYtDnpP7Tx9_3n6p775__nq7vat9o81UG8cdg1aDEbRVVAAPHW-E6ph0upPaK69oUMhCEA2AARm4C40H1K4RSJtzcrX_d5fTnxnLZIdYPPY9jJjmYlUrBZPCLGC7B31OpWQMdpfjAPnJMmpXifa_RLsasmzJVaIVy9zlYcHsBuyOUwdrS__NoQ_FQx8yjD6WIyaU5kqrBbvZY7jIeIyYbfERR49dzOgn26X4zCH_AGV_jnY</recordid><startdate>19930301</startdate><enddate>19930301</enddate><creator>Marx, Gertie F.</creator><creator>Schwalbe, Steven S.</creator><creator>Cho, Elvira</creator><creator>Whitty, Janice E.</creator><general>Mosby, Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19930301</creationdate><title>Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?</title><author>Marx, Gertie F. ; Schwalbe, Steven S. ; Cho, Elvira ; Whitty, Janice E.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c389t-9b2b1a58a9405704a2fd2347d16b8d68c7c70f7e1ff43aa9a6f2bf3cae8b34e03</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1993</creationdate><topic>Auscultation</topic><topic>Automation</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Determination - methods</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Determination - standards</topic><topic>Blood pressure in parturients: auscultatory vs oscillatory method</topic><topic>Delivery. Postpartum. Lactation</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Labor, Obstetric - physiology</topic><topic>Maternal, fetal and perinatal monitoring</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>obstetric anesthesia</topic><topic>Oscillometry</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>pregnancy-induced hypertension</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marx, Gertie F.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwalbe, Steven S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Cho, Elvira</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitty, Janice E.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Marx, Gertie F.</au><au>Schwalbe, Steven S.</au><au>Cho, Elvira</au><au>Whitty, Janice E.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?</atitle><jtitle>American journal of obstetrics and gynecology</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Obstet Gynecol</addtitle><date>1993-03-01</date><risdate>1993</risdate><volume>168</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>796</spage><epage>798</epage><pages>796-798</pages><issn>0002-9378</issn><eissn>1097-6868</eissn><coden>AJOGAH</coden><abstract>OBJECTIVE: In laboring women a consistent difference has become evident between measurements obtained with an automated blood pressure device and those obtained with the auscultatory method. A prospective study was designed to assess the concordance of these two methods. STUDY DESIGN: Three sets of brachial blood pressure measurements were made by both oscillatory and auscultatory techniques in 30 women in labor, 20 term pregnant women not in labor, and 20 nonpregnant volunteers. RESULTS: In the non laboring women and the nonpregnant controls there was satisfactory agreement between the results of the two methods of measurement. In the parturients systolic pressures were consistently and significantly higher and diastolic pressures consistently and significantly lower with the oscillatory compared with the auscultatory method, but mean arterial pressures were not different. CONCLUSION: In laboring women there is a discrepancy between systolic and diastolic pressures obtained by the auscultatory versus the oscillatory method of measurement, although mean pressures are not significantly different. We suggest that during labor the diagnoses of hypertension and hypotension be based on the mean rather than the systolic or diastolic pressure.</abstract><cop>Philadelphia, PA</cop><pub>Mosby, Inc</pub><pmid>8456882</pmid><doi>10.1016/S0002-9378(12)90822-4</doi><tpages>3</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0002-9378
ispartof American journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 1993-03, Vol.168 (3), p.796-798
issn 0002-9378
1097-6868
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_75641649
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Auscultation
Automation
Biological and medical sciences
Blood Pressure Determination - methods
Blood Pressure Determination - standards
Blood pressure in parturients: auscultatory vs oscillatory method
Delivery. Postpartum. Lactation
Female
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Labor, Obstetric - physiology
Maternal, fetal and perinatal monitoring
Medical sciences
obstetric anesthesia
Oscillometry
Pregnancy
pregnancy-induced hypertension
title Automated blood pressure measurements in laboring women: Are they reliable?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-26T17%3A46%3A03IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Automated%20blood%20pressure%20measurements%20in%20laboring%20women:%20Are%20they%20reliable?&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20obstetrics%20and%20gynecology&rft.au=Marx,%20Gertie%20F.&rft.date=1993-03-01&rft.volume=168&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=796&rft.epage=798&rft.pages=796-798&rft.issn=0002-9378&rft.eissn=1097-6868&rft.coden=AJOGAH&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/S0002-9378(12)90822-4&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E75641649%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=75641649&rft_id=info:pmid/8456882&rft_els_id=S0002937812908224&rfr_iscdi=true