Fulltext

Difference in Blood Pressure Readings with Mercury and Automated Devices: Impact on Hypertension Prevalence Estimates in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Chiolero, Arnaud ; Gervasoni, Jean-Pierre ; Rwebogora, Anne ; Balampama, Marianna ; Paccaud, Fred ; Bovet, Pascal

In: European Journal of Epidemiology, 2006, vol. 21, no. 6, p. 427-433

Zum persönliche Liste hinzufügen
    Titel
    • Difference in Blood Pressure Readings with Mercury and Automated Devices: Impact on Hypertension Prevalence Estimates in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
    Autor
    • Chiolero, Arnaud. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
    • Gervasoni, Jean-Pierre. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
    • Rwebogora, Anne. Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
    • Balampama, Marianna. Ministry of Regional Administration and Local Government, Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
    • Paccaud, Fred. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
    • Bovet, Pascal. Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine, University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland
    Dokumententyp
    • Postprint
    Sprache
    • Englisch
    Veröffentlicht in
    • European Journal of Epidemiology, 2006, vol. 21, no. 6, p. 427-433. Kluwer Academic Publishers
    Andere elektronische Ausgabe
    OAI-PMH-ID
    • oai:doc.rero.ch:315378
    Summary
    Objectives: (1) To compare blood pressure (BP) readings with an automated arm cuff oscillometric device (AutoBP) to readings with a mercury sphygmomanometer (HgBP) and (2) to evaluate the impact on the prevalence of hypertension (HBP) in a population-based survey. Methods: (1) In a convenience sample ("Comparison Study”), we measured␣BP with both AutoBP (Visomat® OZ2) and␣HgBP and we modeled BP difference (ΔBP=HgBP−AutoBP) with multiple regression analysis. (2) Using ΔBP, we calculated HgBP in a survey previously conducted in Dar es Salaam ("Population Survey”) in which BP was measured with the automatic device Visomat® OZ2 and we compared the prevalence of HBP (≥140/90mmHg or treatment). Results: In the Comparison Study (404 subjects aged 25-64), systolic/diastolic BP was higher by 4.4/4.7mmHg (SE: 0.4/0.3) with HgBP than AutoBP. The prevalence of HBP was 42% with HgBP and 36% with AutoBP (relative difference of 14%). ΔBP was associated with age, BP and arm circumference. In the Population Survey (9.254 subjects aged 25-64), the prevalence of HBP was 17% with calculated HgBP and 14% with AutoBP (relative difference of 20%). Conclusion: A small systematic bias in BP readings between two different devices had large impact on hypertension prevalence estimates. This suggests that automated devices used in epidemiological studies should be validated with particular care