Agreement between the Takeda UA-731 automatic blood pressure measuring device and the manual mercury sphygmomanometer: An assessment under field conditions in Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health

Volumn 50, Issue 2, 1996, Pages 218-222

  Cartwright, Colin ^a   Unwin, Nigel ^b,c   Stephenson, Peter ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SUNDERLAND   (United Kingdom)

^b NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^c NEWCASTLE UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; ARTICLE; AUTOMATION; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DIASTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; FEMALE; HUMAN; INTERMETHOD COMPARISON; MALE; NORMAL HUMAN; SPHYGMOMANOMETER; SYSTOLIC BLOOD PRESSURE; UNITED KINGDOM;

EID: 0029935109     PISSN: 0143005X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1136/jech.50.2.218     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Bailey RH, Bauer JH. A review of common errors in the indirect measurement of blood pressure. Arch Intern Med 1993;153:2741-8.
2. Stewart MJ, Padfield PL. Measurement of blood pressure in the technological age. Br Med Bull 1994;50:420-42.
3. Bruce NG, Cook DG, Shaper AG. Differences between observers in blood pressure measurement with an automatic oscillometric recorder. J Hypertens 1990;8(suppl): S11-S13.
4. O'Brien E, Atkins N, Mee F, O'Malley K. Comparative accuracy of six ambulatory devices according to blood pressure levels. J Hypertens 1993;11:673-5.
5. A&D Company Ltd. UA-731 Digital blood pressure meter: maintenance manual. A&D Company Ltd, International Division, 1992. (Manual supplied by Surgicon Ltd, Wakefield, Yorkshire).
6. Petrie JC, O'Brien ET, Littler WA, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Dillon MJ. Blood pressure measurement, 2nd ed. London: British Medical Journal, 1990.
7. Jamieson M, Petrie J, O'Brien E, Littler WA, de Sweit M. Blood pressure measurement. Video for the British Hypertension Society. London: British Medical Journal, 1990.
8. Bland AM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of measurement. Lancet 1986;i:307-10.
9. O'Brien E, Petrie J, Littler W, de Sweit M, Padfield PL, O'Malley K, et al. The British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of automated and semi-automated blood pressure measuring devices with special reference to ambulatory systems. J Hypertens 1990;8:607-19.
10. O'Brien E, Petrie J, Littler W, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Altman DG, et al. Short report: an outline of the revised British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens 1993; 11:667-9.
11. White A, Nicolaas G, Foster K, Browne F, Carey S. Health survey for England, 1991. London: HMSO, 1993.
12. Ornstein S, Markert M, Litchfield L, Zemp L. Evaluation of the Dinamap blood pressure monitor in an ambulatory primary care setting. J Fam Pract 1988;26:517-21.
13. Whincup PH, Bruce NG, Cook DG, Shaper AG. The Dinamap 1846SX automated blood pressure recorder: comparison with the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer under field conditions. J Epidemiol Community Health 1992;46:164-9.
14. Bolling K. The Dinamap 8100 calibration study: a survey carried out by the Social Survey of the OPCS on behalf of the Department of Health. London: HMSO, 1994.
15. White WB, Berson AS, Robbins C, Jamieson MJ, Prisant LM, Roccella E, et al. National standard for measuring of resting and ambulatory blood pressures with automated sphygmomanometers. Hypertension 1993;21:504-9.
16. Mackie A, Whincup P, McKinnon M. Does the Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer underestimate blood pressure, and by how much? J Hum Hypertens 1995;9: 337-43.