How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?

The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers. Measurement of accuracy of calibration and evaluation of physical conditions were carried out in 524 sphygmomanometers, 351 from a hospital setting, and 173 from private medical offices....

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of human hypertension 1998-04, Vol.12 (4), p.245-248
Hauptverfasser: MION, D, PIERIN, A. M. G
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 248
container_issue 4
container_start_page 245
container_title Journal of human hypertension
container_volume 12
creator MION, D
PIERIN, A. M. G
description The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers. Measurement of accuracy of calibration and evaluation of physical conditions were carried out in 524 sphygmomanometers, 351 from a hospital setting, and 173 from private medical offices. Mercury sphygmomanometers were considered inaccurate if the meniscus was not '0' at rest. Aneroid sphygmomanometers were tested against a properly calibrated mercury manometer, and were considered calibrated when the error was < or =3 mm Hg. Both types of sphygmomanometers were evaluated for conditions of cuff/bladder, bulb, pump and valve. Of the mercury sphygmomanometers tested 21 % were found to be inaccurate. Of this group, unreliability was noted due to: excessive bouncing (14%), illegibility of the gauge (7%), blockage of the filter (6%), and lack of mercury in the reservoir (3%). Bladder damage was noted in 10% of the hospital devices and in 6% of private medical practices. Rubber aging occurred in 34% and 25%, leaks/holes in 19% and 18%, and leaks in the pump bulb in 16% and 30% of hospital devices and private practice devices, respectively. Of the aneroid sphygmomanometers tested, 44% in the hospital setting and 61% in private medical practices were found to be inaccurate. Of these, the magnitude of inaccuracy was 4-6 mm Hg in 32%, 7-12 mm Hg in 19% and > 13 mm Hg in 7%. In summary, most of the mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers showed inaccuracy (21% vs 58%) and unreliability (64% vs 70%).
doi_str_mv 10.1038/sj.jhh.1000589
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79904509</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>79904509</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-56f0315d0e3beba3d46b0f55c26b8355fbacf4cae66ef83606bce2efcef9d9563</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkM9LwzAUx4Moc06v3oSCw1vna9OkzUlkqBMGXvQckvTFrfTHTFpk_72Zlh08vQffz_vy-BByncAiAVrc-2pRbTZhB2CFOCHTJMt5zFian5IpCAaxSDM4JxfeVwCHsJiQieCQc0GnZL7qviNlzOBUj5FyGPndZv_ZdI1quwZ7dD56uCRnVtUer8Y5Ix_PT-_LVbx-e3ldPq5jQ4u8jxm3QBNWAlKNWtEy4xosYybluqCMWa2MzYxCztEWlAPXBlO0Bq0oBeN0Ru7-eneu-xrQ97LZeoN1rVrsBi9zISBjIAJ4-w-susG14TeZ8gxYzuC3bvFHGdd579DKnds2yu1lAvIgT_pKBnlylBcObsbaQTdYHvHRVsjnY668UbV1qjVbf8TSNJTmlP4AMZF24w</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2640575056</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals</source><source>SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings</source><creator>MION, D ; PIERIN, A. M. G</creator><creatorcontrib>MION, D ; PIERIN, A. M. G</creatorcontrib><description>The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers. Measurement of accuracy of calibration and evaluation of physical conditions were carried out in 524 sphygmomanometers, 351 from a hospital setting, and 173 from private medical offices. Mercury sphygmomanometers were considered inaccurate if the meniscus was not '0' at rest. Aneroid sphygmomanometers were tested against a properly calibrated mercury manometer, and were considered calibrated when the error was &lt; or =3 mm Hg. Both types of sphygmomanometers were evaluated for conditions of cuff/bladder, bulb, pump and valve. Of the mercury sphygmomanometers tested 21 % were found to be inaccurate. Of this group, unreliability was noted due to: excessive bouncing (14%), illegibility of the gauge (7%), blockage of the filter (6%), and lack of mercury in the reservoir (3%). Bladder damage was noted in 10% of the hospital devices and in 6% of private medical practices. Rubber aging occurred in 34% and 25%, leaks/holes in 19% and 18%, and leaks in the pump bulb in 16% and 30% of hospital devices and private practice devices, respectively. Of the aneroid sphygmomanometers tested, 44% in the hospital setting and 61% in private medical practices were found to be inaccurate. Of these, the magnitude of inaccuracy was 4-6 mm Hg in 32%, 7-12 mm Hg in 19% and &gt; 13 mm Hg in 7%. In summary, most of the mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers showed inaccuracy (21% vs 58%) and unreliability (64% vs 70%).</description><identifier>ISSN: 0950-9240</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1476-5527</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1038/sj.jhh.1000589</identifier><identifier>PMID: 9607693</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Basingstoke: Nature Publishing</publisher><subject>Aging ; Arterial hypertension. Arterial hypotension ; Biological and medical sciences ; Blood and lymphatic vessels ; Blood Pressure Determination - instrumentation ; Calibration ; Cardiology. Vascular system ; Clinical manifestations. Epidemiology. Investigative techniques. Etiology ; Equipment Failure ; Evaluation Studies as Topic ; Humans ; Medical practices ; Medical sciences ; Mercury ; Sphygmomanometers - standards</subject><ispartof>Journal of human hypertension, 1998-04, Vol.12 (4), p.245-248</ispartof><rights>1998 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Macmillan Publishers Limited 1998.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-56f0315d0e3beba3d46b0f55c26b8355fbacf4cae66ef83606bce2efcef9d9563</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=2210373$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9607693$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>MION, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PIERIN, A. M. G</creatorcontrib><title>How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?</title><title>Journal of human hypertension</title><addtitle>J Hum Hypertens</addtitle><description>The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers. Measurement of accuracy of calibration and evaluation of physical conditions were carried out in 524 sphygmomanometers, 351 from a hospital setting, and 173 from private medical offices. Mercury sphygmomanometers were considered inaccurate if the meniscus was not '0' at rest. Aneroid sphygmomanometers were tested against a properly calibrated mercury manometer, and were considered calibrated when the error was &lt; or =3 mm Hg. Both types of sphygmomanometers were evaluated for conditions of cuff/bladder, bulb, pump and valve. Of the mercury sphygmomanometers tested 21 % were found to be inaccurate. Of this group, unreliability was noted due to: excessive bouncing (14%), illegibility of the gauge (7%), blockage of the filter (6%), and lack of mercury in the reservoir (3%). Bladder damage was noted in 10% of the hospital devices and in 6% of private medical practices. Rubber aging occurred in 34% and 25%, leaks/holes in 19% and 18%, and leaks in the pump bulb in 16% and 30% of hospital devices and private practice devices, respectively. Of the aneroid sphygmomanometers tested, 44% in the hospital setting and 61% in private medical practices were found to be inaccurate. Of these, the magnitude of inaccuracy was 4-6 mm Hg in 32%, 7-12 mm Hg in 19% and &gt; 13 mm Hg in 7%. In summary, most of the mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers showed inaccuracy (21% vs 58%) and unreliability (64% vs 70%).</description><subject>Aging</subject><subject>Arterial hypertension. Arterial hypotension</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Blood and lymphatic vessels</subject><subject>Blood Pressure Determination - instrumentation</subject><subject>Calibration</subject><subject>Cardiology. Vascular system</subject><subject>Clinical manifestations. Epidemiology. Investigative techniques. Etiology</subject><subject>Equipment Failure</subject><subject>Evaluation Studies as Topic</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical practices</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Mercury</subject><subject>Sphygmomanometers - standards</subject><issn>0950-9240</issn><issn>1476-5527</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1998</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpdkM9LwzAUx4Moc06v3oSCw1vna9OkzUlkqBMGXvQckvTFrfTHTFpk_72Zlh08vQffz_vy-BByncAiAVrc-2pRbTZhB2CFOCHTJMt5zFian5IpCAaxSDM4JxfeVwCHsJiQieCQc0GnZL7qviNlzOBUj5FyGPndZv_ZdI1quwZ7dD56uCRnVtUer8Y5Ix_PT-_LVbx-e3ldPq5jQ4u8jxm3QBNWAlKNWtEy4xosYybluqCMWa2MzYxCztEWlAPXBlO0Bq0oBeN0Ru7-eneu-xrQ97LZeoN1rVrsBi9zISBjIAJ4-w-susG14TeZ8gxYzuC3bvFHGdd579DKnds2yu1lAvIgT_pKBnlylBcObsbaQTdYHvHRVsjnY668UbV1qjVbf8TSNJTmlP4AMZF24w</recordid><startdate>19980401</startdate><enddate>19980401</enddate><creator>MION, D</creator><creator>PIERIN, A. M. G</creator><general>Nature Publishing</general><general>Nature Publishing Group</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>7T5</scope><scope>H94</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>19980401</creationdate><title>How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?</title><author>MION, D ; PIERIN, A. M. G</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c387t-56f0315d0e3beba3d46b0f55c26b8355fbacf4cae66ef83606bce2efcef9d9563</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1998</creationdate><topic>Aging</topic><topic>Arterial hypertension. Arterial hypotension</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Blood and lymphatic vessels</topic><topic>Blood Pressure Determination - instrumentation</topic><topic>Calibration</topic><topic>Cardiology. Vascular system</topic><topic>Clinical manifestations. Epidemiology. Investigative techniques. Etiology</topic><topic>Equipment Failure</topic><topic>Evaluation Studies as Topic</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical practices</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Mercury</topic><topic>Sphygmomanometers - standards</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>MION, D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>PIERIN, A. M. G</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>Immunology Abstracts</collection><collection>AIDS and Cancer Research Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of human hypertension</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>MION, D</au><au>PIERIN, A. M. G</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?</atitle><jtitle>Journal of human hypertension</jtitle><addtitle>J Hum Hypertens</addtitle><date>1998-04-01</date><risdate>1998</risdate><volume>12</volume><issue>4</issue><spage>245</spage><epage>248</epage><pages>245-248</pages><issn>0950-9240</issn><eissn>1476-5527</eissn><abstract>The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy and reliability of mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers. Measurement of accuracy of calibration and evaluation of physical conditions were carried out in 524 sphygmomanometers, 351 from a hospital setting, and 173 from private medical offices. Mercury sphygmomanometers were considered inaccurate if the meniscus was not '0' at rest. Aneroid sphygmomanometers were tested against a properly calibrated mercury manometer, and were considered calibrated when the error was &lt; or =3 mm Hg. Both types of sphygmomanometers were evaluated for conditions of cuff/bladder, bulb, pump and valve. Of the mercury sphygmomanometers tested 21 % were found to be inaccurate. Of this group, unreliability was noted due to: excessive bouncing (14%), illegibility of the gauge (7%), blockage of the filter (6%), and lack of mercury in the reservoir (3%). Bladder damage was noted in 10% of the hospital devices and in 6% of private medical practices. Rubber aging occurred in 34% and 25%, leaks/holes in 19% and 18%, and leaks in the pump bulb in 16% and 30% of hospital devices and private practice devices, respectively. Of the aneroid sphygmomanometers tested, 44% in the hospital setting and 61% in private medical practices were found to be inaccurate. Of these, the magnitude of inaccuracy was 4-6 mm Hg in 32%, 7-12 mm Hg in 19% and &gt; 13 mm Hg in 7%. In summary, most of the mercury and aneroid sphygmomanometers showed inaccuracy (21% vs 58%) and unreliability (64% vs 70%).</abstract><cop>Basingstoke</cop><pub>Nature Publishing</pub><pmid>9607693</pmid><doi>10.1038/sj.jhh.1000589</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0950-9240
ispartof Journal of human hypertension, 1998-04, Vol.12 (4), p.245-248
issn 0950-9240
1476-5527
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_79904509
source MEDLINE; Elektronische Zeitschriftenbibliothek - Frei zugängliche E-Journals; SpringerLink Journals - AutoHoldings
subjects Aging
Arterial hypertension. Arterial hypotension
Biological and medical sciences
Blood and lymphatic vessels
Blood Pressure Determination - instrumentation
Calibration
Cardiology. Vascular system
Clinical manifestations. Epidemiology. Investigative techniques. Etiology
Equipment Failure
Evaluation Studies as Topic
Humans
Medical practices
Medical sciences
Mercury
Sphygmomanometers - standards
title How accurate are sphygmomanometers ?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-12T19%3A08%3A15IST&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=How%20accurate%20are%20sphygmomanometers%20?&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20human%20hypertension&rft.au=MION,%20D&rft.date=1998-04-01&rft.volume=12&rft.issue=4&rft.spage=245&rft.epage=248&rft.pages=245-248&rft.issn=0950-9240&rft.eissn=1476-5527&rft_id=info:doi/10.1038/sj.jhh.1000589&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E79904509%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=2640575056&rft_id=info:pmid/9607693&rfr_iscdi=true