Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of a novel mobile phone application for blood pressure monitoring: a proof of concept study

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

To provide information about the clinical relevance of blood pressure (BP) measurement differences between a new smartphone application (OptiBP™) and the reference method (automated oscillometric technique) using a noninvasive brachial cuff in patients admitted to the emergency department. We simultaneously recorded three BP measurements using both the reference method and the novel OptiBP™ (test method), except when the inter-arm difference was > 10 mmHg BP. Each OptiBP™ measurement required 1-min and the subsequent reference method values were compared to the values obtained with OptiBP™ using a Bland–Altman analysis and error grid analysis. Among the 110 patients recruited, OptiBP™ BP values could be collected on 61 patients (55%) and were included in the statistical analysis. The mean of differences (95% limits of agreement) between the reference method and the test method were − 0.1(− 22.5 to 22.4 mmHg) for systolic arterial pressure (SAP), − 0.1(− 12.9 to 12.7 mmHg) for diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) and − 0.3(− 18.1 to 17.4 mmHg) for mean arterial pressure (MAP). The proportions of measurements in risk zones A-E were 86.9%, 13.1%, 0%, 0%, and 0% for MAP and 89.3%, 10.7%, 0%, 0%, and 0% for SAP. In this pilot study conducted in stable and awake patients admitted to the emergency department, the absolute agreement between the OptiBP™ and the reference method was moderate. However, when BP measurements were made immediately after an initial calibration, error grid analysis showed that 100% of measurement differences between the OptiBP™ and reference method were categorized as no- or low-risk treatment decisions for all patients.

Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04121624.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Elliott WJ. Systemic hypertension. Curr Probl Cardiol. 2007;32:201–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension: The task force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens. 2018;36:1953–2041.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Patel AA. Developing and evaluating mhealth solutions for chronic disease prevention in primary care. Circulation. 2019;139:392–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Stojanova A, Koceski S, Koceska N. Continuous blood pressure monitoring as a basis for Ambient Assisted Living (AAL)—review of methodologies and devices. J Med Syst. 2019;43:24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Ghamri Y, Proença M, Hofmann G, et al. Automated pulse oximeter waveform analysis to track changes in blood pressure during anesthesia induction: A proof-of-concept study. Anesth Analg. 2020;130:1222–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Schoettker P, Degott J, Hofmann G, et al. Blood pressure measurements with the OptiBP smartphone app validated against reference auscultatory measurements. Sci Rep. 2020;10:17827.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Saugel B, Grothe O, Nicklas JY. Error grid analysis for arterial pressure method comparison studies. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:1177–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Grothe O, Kaplan A, Kouz K, Saugel B. Computer program for error grid analysis in arterial blood pressure method comparison studies. Anesth Analg. 2020;130:e71–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Proenca M, Bonnier G, Ferrario D, Verjus C, Lemay M. PPG-based blood pressure monitoring by pulse wave analysis: Calibration parameters are stable for three months. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2019;2019:5560–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Ramsey M 3rd. Blood pressure monitoring: automated oscillometric devices. J Clin Monit. 1991;7:56–67.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Benmira A, Perez-Martin A, Schuster I, et al. From Korotkoff and Marey to automatic non-invasive oscillometric blood pressure measurement: does easiness come with reliability? Expert Rev Med Devices. 2016;13:179–89.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Stergiou GS, Palatini P, Asmar R, et al. Recommendations and Practical Guidance for performing and reporting validation studies according to the Universal Standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO). J Hypertens. 2019;37:459–66.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kaufmann T, Cox EGM, Wiersema R, et al. Non-invasive oscillometric versus invasive arterial blood pressure measurements in critically ill patients: A post hoc analysis of a prospective observational study. J Crit Care. 2020;57:118–23.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Juri T, Suehiro K, Uchimoto A, et al. Error grid analysis for risk management in the difference between invasive and noninvasive blood pressure measurements. J Anesth. 2021;35:189–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Kuck K, Baker PD. Perioperative Noninvasive Blood Pressure Monitoring. Anesth Analg. 2018;127:408–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

All the clinicians and nurses from the emergency department.

Funding

This work was supported by the Department of Anesthesiology, Erasme Hospital, Brussels.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesiology and Perioperative Medicine Sauvegarde Clinic, Ramsay Santé, Lyon, France

    Olivier Desebbe

  2. Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1, Lyon, France

    Amina Tighenifi

  3. Department of Anesthesiology, Erasme Hospital, Université Libre de Bruxelles, 808 route de lennik, 1070, Brussels, Belgium

    Alexandra Jacobs, Yassine Zekhini, Dragos Chirnoaga & Alexandre Joosten

  4. Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Hôpitaux Universitaires Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Paul Brousse Hospital, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris (APHP), Villejuif, France

    Leila Toubal & Alexandre Joosten

  5. Department of Anesthesiology, Médipole Lyon Villeurbanne, Léon Blum, France

    Vincent Collange

  6. Department of Anesthesiology, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, San Diego, CA, USA

    Brenton Alexander

  7. Biospectal SA, 1003, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Jean Francois Knebel

  8. Department of Anesthesiology, Lausanne University Hospital and University of Lausanne, Lausanne, Switzerland

    Patrick Schoettker

Authors
  1. Olivier Desebbe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amina Tighenifi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexandra Jacobs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Leila Toubal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yassine Zekhini
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Dragos Chirnoaga
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Vincent Collange
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Brenton Alexander
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Jean Francois Knebel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Patrick Schoettker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Alexandre Joosten
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors read and approved the final manuscript. OD: Designed the study, analyzed the data and drafted the final manuscript. AT: Analyzed the data and drafted the final manuscript. AJ: Collected the data and edited the final manuscript. LT, YZ, DC, VC, BA, JFK, PS: Analyzed the data and edited the final manuscript. AJ: Designed the study, collected and analyzed the data and drafted the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Alexandre Joosten.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

OD is consultant for Medtronic (Trévoux, FRANCE) and and Livanova (Châtillon, France). JFK is working for Biospectal SA, Lausanne, Switzerland. PS is an advisor of Biospectal SA, Lausanne, Switzerland. AJ is a consultant for Edwards Lifesciences (Irvine, California, USA). The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Desebbe, O., Tighenifi, A., Jacobs, A. et al. Evaluation of a novel mobile phone application for blood pressure monitoring: a proof of concept study. J Clin Monit Comput 36, 1147–1153 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-021-00749-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-021-00749-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation