The application of automated blood pressure measurement during exercise has been limited by inaccuracies introduced by the effects of accompanying motion and noise. We evaluated a newly developed automated blood pressure monitor for measuring exercise blood pressure (Colin STBP-680; Colin, San Antonio, Texas, USA). The STBP-680 uses acoustic transduction with the assistance of the electrocardiogram R-wave to trigger the sampling period for blood pressure measurement. The automated monitor readings were compared with simultaneous technician mercury sphygmomanometric readings in the same arm. Blood pressure was measured in 18 men at rest and during exercise at 40% VO2 peak, (low intensity), 70% VO2 peak (moderate intensity) and VO2 peak (high intensity) on the cycle ergometer. Mean(s.d.) systolic blood pressure difference between the automated monitor and mercury manometer readings at rest and during exercise at low, moderate and high work intensities were 3(0) mmHg, 3(2) mmHg, 1(1) mmHg, and 0(11) mmHg respectively (analysis of variance; P > 0.05). Resting diastolic blood pressure obtained with the STBP-680 was similar to the mercury manometer readings (78(10) versus 81(7) mmHg (P > 0.05). Exercise diastolic pressure at the low level of work intensity was almost identical between the automated monitor and mercury manometer readings (64(8) versus 65(10) mmHg (not significant)). Diastolic blood pressure readings between the STBP-680 and mercury manometer showed a greater difference at the moderate and high workloads (11 mmHg and 9 mmHg, respectively), but this difference was not significant (P > 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.