Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A poor correlation exists between oscillometric and radial arterial blood pressure as measured by the Philips MP90 monitor

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

Abstract

In anesthesia and critical care, invasive arterial blood pressure monitoring is the gold standard against which other methods of monitoring are compared. In this assessment of the Philips MP90 monitor, the objective was to determine whether or not oscillometric measurements were within the accuracy standards set by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) and the British Hypertension Society (BHS). Three hundred and one invasive and noninvasive paired measurements were obtained from eleven adult patients on the neurosurgical service at Stanford University Medical Center. Bland–Altman plots were created to assess agreement between the two measurement systems. Paired correlation analysis, bias and precision calculations were performed. Oscillometric blood pressure measurements correlated with arterial measurements yielding Pearson r values of 0.68, 0.67 and 0.62 for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively (P < 0.01.) Mean differences with 95% confidence intervals were −3.8 mmHg ± 13.6, −2.4 mmHg ± 10.0, and 4.0 mmHg ± 13.1 for systolic, diastolic and mean pressures, respectively. The mean difference for these measurements was ≤5 mmHg as stipulated by the AAMI guidelines, but the standard deviation was greater than the 8 mmHg allowed by the AAMI guidelines. When the BHS guidelines were applied, the device merited a grade “D” for systolic and mean arterial pressure, and a grade “C” for diastolic pressure, with the highest possible grade level being “A.” There was a poor correlation between noninvasive and invasive measurements of arterial blood pressure as measured with a cuff and radial arterial cannula using the Philips MP90 monitor. These inaccuracies could lead to unnecessary interventions, or lack of appropriate interventions in anesthetic management. Further study is needed to specify the absolute inaccuracy of the monitor, and to determine if accuracy between the two methods varies with patient co-morbidities, surgical procedures, or anesthetic management.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. American Society of Anesthesiologists. ASA standards, guidelines and statements; standards for basic anesthesia monitoring: ASA (2005). http://www.asahq.org/publicationsAndServices/sgstoc.htm.

  2. Stolt M, Sjönell G, Aström H, Hansson L. Factors affecting the validity of the standard blood pressure cuff. Clin Physiol. 1993;13(6):611–20.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Moskowitz DM, Reitz DL. Hemodynamic Monitoring. Anesthesiol Clin N Am. 1997;15(1):15–36.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Green M, Paulus DA, Roan VP, Van der Aa J. Comparison between oscillometric and invasive blood pressure monitoring during cardiac surgery. Int J Clin Monit Comput. 1984;1(1):21–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gabriel A, Lindblad LE, Angleryd C. Non-invasive vs. invasive beat-to-beat monitoring of blood pressure. Clin Physiol. 1992;12(2):229–35.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Rutten AJ, Ilsley AH, Skowronski GA, Runciman WB. A comparative study of the measurement of mean arterial blood pressure using automatic oscillometers, arterial cannulation and auscultation. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1986;14(1):58–65.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Francke A, Wachsmuth H. How accurate is invasive blood pressure determination with fluid-filled pressure line systems? Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2000;25(2):46–54.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation. American National Standard. Manual, electronic or automated sphygmomanometers ANSI/AAMI SP10-2002/A1. 3330 Washington Boulevard, Suite 400, Arlington, VA 22201-4598, USA: AAMI; 2003.

  9. O’Brien E, Petrie J, Littler WA, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Altman D, et al. The British Hypertension Society Protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens. 1993;11(Suppl 2):S43–63.

    Google Scholar 

  10. O’Brien E, Petrie J, Littler WA, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Altman D, et al. Short report. An outline of the British Hypertension Society Protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens. 1993;11:677–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. O’Brien E, Waeber B, Parati G, Staessen J, Myers M. Blood pressure measuring devices: recommendations of the European Society of Hypertension. BMJ. 2001;322:531–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. O’Brien E. State of the market for devices for blood pressure measurement. Blood Press Monit. 2001;6(6):281–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chemla D, Teboul JL, Richard C. Noninvasive assessment of arterial pressure. Curr Opin Crit Care. 2008;14(3):317–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Manios E, Vemmos K, Tsivgoulis G, Barlas G, Koroboki E, Spengos K, et al. Comparison of noninvasive oscillometric and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in hyperacute stroke. Blood Press Monit. 2007;12(3):149–56.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Amoore JN, Lemesre Y, Murray IC, Mieke S, King ST, Smith FE, et al. Automatic blood pressure measurement: the oscillometric waveform shape is a potential contributor to differences between oscillometric and auscultatory pressure measurements. J Hypertens. 2008;26(1):35–43.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Amoore JN, Vacher E, Murray IC, Mieke S, King ST, Smith FE, et al. Effect of the shapes of the oscillometric pulse amplitude envelopes and their characteristic ratios on the differences between auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressure measurements. Blood Press Monit. 2007;12(5):297–305.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. O’Brien E, Pickering T, Asmar R, Myers M, Parati G, Staessen J, Mengden T, Imai Y, Waeber B, Palatini P with the statistical assistance of Atkins N and Gerin W on behalf of the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring of the European Society of Hypertension. International protocol for validation of blood pressure measuring devices in adults. Blood Press Monit 2002; 7: 3–17.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA, USA

    Samuel A. Mireles MD, Richard A. Jaffe MD, PhD, David R. Drover MD & John G. Brock-Utne MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Samuel A. Mireles MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard A. Jaffe MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. David R. Drover MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. John G. Brock-Utne MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Samuel A. Mireles MD.

Additional information

Mireles SA, Jaffe RA, Drover DR, Brock-Utne JG. A poor correlation exists between oscillometric and radial arterial blood pressure as measured by the Philips MP90 monitor.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mireles, S.A., Jaffe, R.A., Drover, D.R. et al. A poor correlation exists between oscillometric and radial arterial blood pressure as measured by the Philips MP90 monitor. J Clin Monit Comput 23, 169–174 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-009-9178-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-009-9178-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation