Author/Authors :
Emami, Mahmood Yazd Cardiovascular Research Institute - Yazd University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, IR Iran , Shafie, Davood Cardiovascular Research Institute - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran , Vakhshoori, Mehrbod Interventional Cardiology Research Center - Cardiovascular Research Institute - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran , Eghbali-Babadi, Maryam Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center - School of Nursing and Midwifery - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran , Ahmadipour, Elham Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Center - Cardiovascular Research Institute - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran , Khosravi, Alireza Hypertension Research Center - Isfahan Cardiovascular Research Institute - Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, IR Iran
Abstract :
Background: Detecting the suitable non-invasive Blood Pressure (BP) measurement
method is a quandary in clinical settings for accurate diagnosis of Hypertension (HTN)
status.
Objectives: This study aimed to evaluate the efficiency of indirect BP measurement
methods in comparison to the gold standard among Iranian patients admitted for
Coronary Angiography (CAG).
Methods: This observational study was conducted on 150 CAG candidates randomly
selected using the computerized random numbers from March 2019 to September
2019. The participants’ BPs were measured via three different non-invasive methods,
including brachial and wrist oscillometric cuffs plus brachial sphygmomanometer, and
the results were compared to simultaneous intra-arterial reading as the gold standard.
The associations between different non-invasive BP measurements and direct arterial
BP reading were assessed using different statistical analyses, including correlation
coefficient, chi-square, independent and paired t-test, and Analysis of Variance
(ANOVA), as appropriated.
Results: The mean age of the participants was 60.56 ± 11.16 years. Both Systolic BP (SBP)
and Diastolic BP (DBP) were positively correlated to the gold standard reading in all
measurement methods (P < 0.001). After adjustment for potential confounders, the findings
revealed no significant difference between the pre-defined BP measurement methods,
including brachial sphygmomanometer, brachial oscillometric, and wrist oscillometric,
and intra-arterial BP reading regarding the means of SBP and DBP (P > 0.05).
Conclusions: The present study findings showed that the selected solution was appropriate
in terms of clinical aspects for the patients undergoing CABG surgery with long surgical
duration or low Ejection Fraction (EF) and reduced the costs to half. Considering the
significant difference in the CK-MB level and the lower troponin level in the combined
group (not statistically significant), further studies are required to confirm the clinical
priority of the combined solution.
