258 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 10212342)
1. Age-based differences between mercury sphygmomanometer and pulse dynamic blood pressure measurements.
Brinton TJ; Walls ED; Yajnik AK; Chio SS
Blood Press Monit; 1998 Apr; 3(2):125-129. PubMed ID: 10212342
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Validation of pulse dynamic blood pressure measurement by auscultation.
Brinton TJ; Walls ED; Chio SS
Blood Press Monit; 1998 Apr; 3(2):121-124. PubMed ID: 10212341
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Effect of the shapes of the oscillometric pulse amplitude envelopes and their characteristic ratios on the differences between auscultatory and oscillometric blood pressure measurements.
Amoore JN; Vacher E; Murray IC; Mieke S; King ST; Smith FE; Murray A
Blood Press Monit; 2007 Oct; 12(5):297-305. PubMed ID: 17890968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Validation of three oscillometric blood pressure devices against auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in children.
Wong SN; Tz Sung RY; Leung LC
Blood Press Monit; 2006 Oct; 11(5):281-91. PubMed ID: 16932037
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. A comparison between the oscillometric and the auscultatory method for ambulatory 24 h blood pressure monitoring.
Wiinberg N; Raymond IE; Bang LE; Malmqvist BB; Svendsen TL; Petersen LJ
Blood Press Monit; 1996 Jun; 1(3):187-191. PubMed ID: 10226224
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of Automated and Mercury Column Blood Pressure Measurements in Health Care Settings.
Pavlik VN; Hyman DJ; Toronjo C
J Clin Hypertens (Greenwich); 2000 Mar; 2(2):81-86. PubMed ID: 11416630
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Clinical blood pressure measurement verification when comparing a Tensoval duo control device with a mercury sphygmomanometer in patients suffering from atrial fibrillation.
Farsky S; Benova K; Krausova D; Sirotiaková J; Vysocanova P
Blood Press Monit; 2011 Oct; 16(5):252-7. PubMed ID: 21914986
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. [Comparison between brachial blood pressures obtained by aneroid sphygmomanometer and central aortic pressures: factors affecting the measurements].
Kayrak M; Ulgen MS; Yazici M; Demir K; Doğan Y; Koç F; Zengin K; Ari H
Turk Kardiyol Dern Ars; 2008 Jun; 36(4):239-46. PubMed ID: 18765967
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Superiority of home blood pressure measurements over office measurements for testing antihypertensive drugs.
Vaur L; Dubroca I; Dutrey-Dupagne C; Genès N; Chatellier G; Bouvier-d'Yvoire M; Elkik F; Ménard J
Blood Press Monit; 1998 Apr; 3(2):107-114. PubMed ID: 10212339
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Validation of the A&D TM-2430 device for ambulatory blood pressure monitoring and evaluation of performance according to subjects' characteristics.
Palatini P; Frigo G; Bertolo O; Roman E; Da Cortà R ; Winnicki M
Blood Press Monit; 1998 Aug; 3(4):255-260. PubMed ID: 10212363
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Oscillometric finger blood pressure versus brachial auscultative blood pressure recording.
Iyriboz Y
J Fam Pract; 1990 Oct; 31(4):376-80. PubMed ID: 2212968
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Random zero sphygmomanometer versus automatic oscillometric blood pressure monitor; is either the instrument of choice?
Goonasekera CD; Dillon MJ
J Hum Hypertens; 1995 Nov; 9(11):885-9. PubMed ID: 8583467
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. A comparison of two sphygmomanometers that may replace the traditional mercury column in the healthcare workplace.
Elliott WJ; Young PE; DeVivo L; Feldstein J; Black HR
Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):23-8. PubMed ID: 17303984
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Evaluation of the Datascope Accutorr Plus according to the recommendations of the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation.
Anwar YA; Tendler BE; McCabe EJ; Mansoor GA; White WB
Blood Press Monit; 1997 Apr; 2(2):105-110. PubMed ID: 10234101
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Unreliable oscillometric blood pressure measurement: prevalence, repeatability and characteristics of the phenomenon.
Stergiou GS; Lourida P; Tzamouranis D; Baibas NM
J Hum Hypertens; 2009 Dec; 23(12):794-800. PubMed ID: 19322203
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. In vitro and in vivo evaluation of an oscillometric device for monitoring blood pressure in dialysis patients.
Lodi CA; Estridge C; Ghidini C
Nephrol Dial Transplant; 2007 Oct; 22(10):2950-61. PubMed ID: 17556423
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Validation of the Braun BP 3550 wrist blood pressure measuring device with a position sensor and an EasyClick cuff according to the International Protocol in adults.
Ilman N; Altunkan S; Kayatürk N; Altunkan E
Blood Press Monit; 2007 Feb; 12(1):45-9. PubMed ID: 17303987
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. Validation of TM-2655 oscillometric device for blood pressure measurement.
Kobalava ZD; Kotovskaya YV; Babaeva LA; Moiseev VS
Blood Press Monit; 2006 Apr; 11(2):87-90. PubMed ID: 16534410
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
19. Comparison of Dinamap PRO-100 and mercury sphygmomanometer blood pressure measurements in a population-based study.
Ni H; Wu C; Prineas R; Shea S; Liu K; Kronmal R; Bild D
Am J Hypertens; 2006 Apr; 19(4):353-60. PubMed ID: 16580569
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Automatic blood pressure measurement: the oscillometric waveform shape is a potential contributor to differences between oscillometric and auscultatory pressure measurements.
Amoore JN; Lemesre Y; Murray IC; Mieke S; King ST; Smith FE; Murray A
J Hypertens; 2008 Jan; 26(1):35-43. PubMed ID: 18090538
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
[Next] [New Search]
