Validación de los esfigmomanómetros aneroide y electrónico frente al esfigmomanómetro de mercurio. Hospital José Carrasco Arteaga. Cuenca, 2014

Abstract

Objective. Validate aneroid sphygmomanometers and electronic versus mercury with BHS and AAMI protocols European regulations.

Material and methods. In the period from June to September of 2014 564 insured hospital patients were included José Carrasco Arteaga. Blood pressure was measured in compliance with the standard procedure of the American Society of Hypertension and the validity of the aneroid and mercury devices using the protocols discussed: 1) BHS categorization based ABCD where A is closest to the gold standard and C invalidates the device and 2) that only validates AAMI devices whose measurements differ by ± 5 mm Hg between average and ± 8 mm Hg between the standard deviations of the gold standard.

Results. 33 patients were excluded for less than the required age. The mean age of the 531 patients was 54.1 ± 14.9 years (25-93) with a predominance of women (58.5%). BHS protocol. In aneroid-mercury contrasting 99.6% of measurements of SBP and DBP 99.8% was located in category A. In electronic-mercury contrasting 95.3% of SBP and 88.9% DBP had equal status. AAMI protocol. Aneroid-mercury difference for SBP was 0.81 ± 1.31 mm Hg and DBP of 1.00 ± 1.52 mm Hg. The electronic-mercury difference in SBP was 1.93 ± 2.32 mm Hg and DBP of 2.507 ± 2.49 mm Hg.

Implications: Based validating both devices have precision required by international protocols European regulations regarding mercury sphygmomanometer, the information is reliable. The aneroid sphygmomanometer is close to the gold standard.