Response to "automated sphygmomanometers should not replace manual ones, based on current evidence"

American Journal of Hypertension

Volumn 21, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 846-

  Myers, Martin G ^a,b   McInnis, Natalie H ^c   Fodor, George J ^c   Leenen, Frans H H ^c  

^a SUNNYBROOK RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF TORONTO   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF OTTAWA HEART INSTITUTE   (Canada)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATION; BLOOD PRESSURE MONITORING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; HYPERTENSION; INSTRUMENT VALIDATION; LETTER; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SPHYGMOMANOMETER;

EID: 47749123895     PISSN: 08957061     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/ajh.2008.205     Document Type: Letter

References (6)

1. Myers MG, McInnis NH, Fodor GJ, Leenen FH. Comparison between an automated and manual sphygmomanometer in a population survey. Am J Hypertens 2008; 21:280-283.
2. Mattu GS, Perry TL Jr, Wright JM. Comparison of the oscillometric blood pressure monitor (BPM-100) with the auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer. Blood Press Monit 2001; 6:161-165.
3. Wright JM, Mattu GS, Perry TL Jr, Gelfer ME, Strange KD, Zorn A, Chen Y. Validation of a new algorithm for the BPM-100 electronic oscillometric office blood pressure monitor. Blood Press Monit 2001; 6:161-165.
4. Myers MG. Automated blood pressure measurement in routine clinical practice. Blood Press Monit 2006; 11:59-62.
5. Turner MJ, van Schalkwyk, JM. Automated sphygmomanometers should not replace manual ones, based on current evidence. Am J Hypertens 2008; 21:845.
6. Pickering TG, Hall JE, Appel LJ, Falkner BE, Graves J, Hill MN, Jones DW, Kurtz T, Sheps SG, Roccella EJ. Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans: a statement for professionals from the Subcommittee of Professional and Public Education of the American Heart Association Council on High Blood Pressure Research. Hypertension 2005; 45:142-161.