ESPN 51th Annual Meeting

ESPN 2018


 
COMPARISON BETWEEN OSCILLOMETRIC AND AUSCULTATORY BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS
ALI DUZOVA 1 ESRA BASKIN 2 NILGUN CAKAR 3 OGUZ SOYLEMEZOGLU 4 FATOS YALCINKAYA 3 MUTLU HAYRAN 5

1- DIVISION OF PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF MEDICINE, ANKARA
2- DIVISION OF PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, BA┼×KENT UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF MEDICINE, ANKARA
3- DIVISION OF PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, ANKARA UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF MEDICINE, ANKARA
4- DIVISION OF PEDIATRIC NEPHROLOGY, GAZI UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF MEDICINE, ANKARA
5- DIVISION OF CANCER EPIDEMIOLOGY, HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY CANCER INSTITUTE, ANKARA
 
Introduction:

Oscillometric automated devices for blood pressure (BP) measurement do not require specialist training; and they have become the standard for BP measurements in adults. Data for children is limited. We aimed to compare oscillometric and auscultatory methods for the measurement of BP in children and adolescents.

Material and methods:

The study group, consisted of 6-18 years old school children without known medical disorders (905 volunteers; mean age 12.34 ± 3.54 years; 51.8% female). BP was measured three times in the right arm with appropriate cuff size and standard procedures for oscillometric and auscultatory methods, using validated devices. Mean systolic (SBP), diastolic (DBP), and mean arterial pressure (MAP) values were calculated using second and third measurements for each method.  Coefficient of variation [100 x (absolute difference)/(mean)] between second and third measurements were calculated. Differences [oscillometric -auscultatory] and relative differences [100 x (oscillometric -auscultatory)/auscultatory] between two methods were calculated for SBP, DBP, and MAP.

Results:

Mean coefficient of variations for SBP, DBP, and MAP with auscultatory method were 1.34%, 1.8%, and 1.42%, respectively. Mean coefficient of variations for SBP, DBP, and MAP with oscillometric method were 4.89%, 8.9%, and 5.93%, respectively. Median difference between oscillometric and auscultatory methods for SBP, DBP, and MAP were 9 mm Hg, 3.5 mm Hg, and 5.5 mm Hg, respectively. Median relative differences between oscillometric and auscultatory methods for SBP, DBP, and MAP were 9%, 5%, and 7%, respectively. Differences and relative differences between oscillometric and auscultatory methods were both higher in younger age groups (p<0.001).

 

Conclusions:

BP measurements in a cohort of children and adolescents without medical disorders showed that both coefficient of variation and measured BP values were significantly higher with oscillometric method, compared to auscultatory method; especially in the younger age group. Oscillometric devices may be appropriate alternative for BP screening in children and adolescents; but they should be improved. Elevated oscillometric BP values should be checked with auscultatory method.