The random-zero versus the standard mercury sphygmomanometer: a systematic blood pressure difference.
The random-zero versus the standard mercury sphygmomanometer: a systematic blood pressure difference.
复制标题
随机零血压计与标准水银血压计：系统血压差异。
DOI：
10.1093/oxfordjournals.aje.a113998
复制
发表时间：
1985
影响因子：
5
通讯作者：
Luepker,RV
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
deGaudemaris,R;Folsom,AR;Prineas,RJ;Luepker,RV
在流行病学研究中，随机零血压计和标准水银血压计经常使用，有时甚至可以互换使用。为了确定它们之间是否存在系统性差异，作者在一系列六项实验中同时使用两台血压计测量了收缩压、第四相和第五相舒张压。对于大多数实验，同步血压测量系统采用一根袖带连接两个血压计，并由两名训练有素的技术人员使用双听诊器仔细校准和读数。随机零血压计的使用顺序是随机分配的，技术人员对彼此的读数一无所知。在放气率为 2 mmHg/秒时，随机零血压计的读数系统地低于标准水银血压计的读数，收缩压为 -0.9 mmHg，第四相血压为 -1.8 mmHg，第五相舒张压为 -1.8 mmHg（所有差异，p<0.001）。在调整受试者年龄、性别、心率、血压水平、观察者和室温后，这种差异仍然存在，并且存在不同的通货紧缩率。然而，通过排出随机零血压计中的残留汞并像使用标准水银血压计一样使用该仪器，可以消除两者之间的大部分差异。这表明差异的机制与随机零压力计管中汞的高度增加有关。作者得出的结论是，在流行病学研究中，随机零血压计和标准水银血压计不应互换使用。
The random-zero and standard mercury sphygmomanometers are used frequently, and sometimes interchangeably, in epidemiologic studies. To determine whether there is a systematic difference between them, the authors measured systolic, fourth-phase, and fifth-phase diastolic blood pressures using both sphygmomanometers simultaneously in a series of six experiments. For most experiments, the system for simultaneous blood pressure measurements employed one cuff connected to both sphygmomanometers, which were carefully calibrated and read by two trained technicians using a double stethoscope. Order of use of the random-zero sphygmomanometer was randomly assigned, and technicians were blind to each others readings. At deflation rates of 2 mmHg/second, readings of the random-zero sphygmomanometer were systematically lower than those of the standard mercury sphygmomanometer −0.9 mmHg for systolic, −1.8 mmHg for fourth-phase, and −1.8 mmHg for fifth-phase diastolic blood pressures (all differences, p<0.001). The difference persisted after adjustment for subject age, sex, heart rate, blood pressure level, observer, and room temperature, and was present for varying deflation rates. However, by draining the residual mercury from a random-zero sphygmomanometer and using the instrument as if it were a standard mercury sphygmomanometer, much of the difference between the two was eliminated. This suggests that the mechanism for the difference relates to the increased height of mercury in the random-zero manometer tube. The authors conclude that the random-zero and standard mercury sphygmomanometers should not be used interchangeably in epidemiologic studies.