The first study comparing a wearable watch-type blood pressure monitor with a conventional ambulatory blood pressure monitor on in-office and out-of-office settings.

Clicks: 202
ID: 83954
2020
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Emerging

Ranked #13 of 14 articles by views in journal of clinical hypertension (greenwich, conn)

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Wearable blood pressure (BP) monitoring devices which measure BP levels accurately both in and out of the office are valuable for hypertension management using digital technology. The authors have conducted the first comparison study of BPs measured by a recently developed wrist-worn watch-type oscillometric BP monitoring (WBPM) device, the "HeartGuide," versus BPs measured by an ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM) device, A&D TM-2441, in the office (total of 4 readings alternately measured in the sitting position) and outside the office (30-minutes interval measurements during daytime) in 50 consecutive patients (mean age 66.1 ± 10.8 years). The 2 BP monitoring devices were simultaneously worn on the same non-dominant arm throughout the monitoring period. The mean difference (±SD) in systolic BPs (average of 2 readings) between WBPM and ABPM was 0.8 ± 12.8 mm Hg (P = .564) in the office and 3.2 ± 17.0 mm Hg (P < .001) outside the office. The proportion of differences that were within ±10 mm Hg was 58.7% in the office and 47.2% outside the office. In a mixed-effects model analysis, the temporal trend in the difference between the out-of-office BPs measured by the two devices was not statistically significant. In conclusion, the difference between the WBPM and ABPM device was acceptable both in and out of the office.
Reference Key
kario2020thejournal Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Kario, Kazuomi;Shimbo, Daichi;Tomitani, Naoko;Kanegae, Hiroshi;Schwartz, Joseph E;Williams, Bryan;
Journal journal of clinical hypertension (greenwich, conn)
Year 2020
DOI
10.1111/jch.13799
URL
Keywords

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.