• Users Online: 299
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Ahead of print Current issue Search Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 5  |  Issue : 3  |  Page : 171-176

Impact on variation in the direction of cuff bladder on blood pressure readings


1 Department of Family Medicine, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Kano, Nigeria
2 Department of Surgery, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria
3 Department of Paediatrics, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Bayero University Kano, Kano, Nigeria

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Ibrahim Aliyu
Department of Paediatrics, Aminu Kano Teaching Hospital, Bayero University Kano, Kano
Nigeria
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jpcs.jpcs_36_19

Rights and Permissions

Introduction: Elevated blood pressure (BP)/hypertension contributes significantly to global morbidity and mortality. It is a silent killer; therefore, earlier diagnosis is imperative. A simple instrument called sphygmomanometer measures BP. Getting an accurate and precise reading is essential for making the diagnosis. Our study sorts to determine if there is any significant change in BP readings when the bladder cuff is inverted during BP measurement. Materials and Methods: This was a cross-sectional study involving 540 individuals who were consecutively recruited from the outpatient clinics over a year period. BP was measured with a mercury sphygmomanometer in three postures of sitting, standing, and supine comparing the standard protocol (control) and our designed protocol of inverted cuff (test). Results: The mean systolic and diastolic BP for all the postures for both sexes were significantly corresponding for both test positions in majority of the age groups; all observed differences in means were <5 mmHg which is within the acceptable limit. The Bland–Altman plot showed significant agreement for the control and test positions in diastole and systole in all the three postures. The mean of the differences of the control and test procedures were −0.38 ± 2.70, 0.27 ± 2.18 (diastole and systole in sitting); −0.46 ± 2.88, 0.09 ± 1.58 (diastole and systole in standing); −0.62 ± 3.14, 0.09 ± 1.82 (diastole and systole in supine). Conclusion: Our test procedure showed agreement with the standard protocol of cuff positioning. Therefore, it could be used interchangeably.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed74    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded12    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal