551 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 21107434)
1. Replacing the mercury manometer with an oscillometric device in a hypertension clinic: implications for clinical decision making.
Stergiou GS; Lourida P; Tzamouranis D
J Hum Hypertens; 2011 Nov; 25(11):692-8. PubMed ID: 21107434
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Comparison of automated oscillometric versus auscultatory blood pressure measurement.
Landgraf J; Wishner SH; Kloner RA
Am J Cardiol; 2010 Aug; 106(3):386-8. PubMed ID: 20643251
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Similarity between blood pressure values assessed by auscultatory method with mercury sphygmomanometer and automated oscillometric digital device.
Pavan MV; Saura GE; Korkes HA; Nascimento KM; Madeira Neto ND; Dávila R; Rodrigues CI; Almeida FA
J Bras Nefrol; 2012 Mar; 34(1):43-9. PubMed ID: 22441181
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. A perfect replacement for the mercury sphygmomanometer: the case of the hybrid blood pressure monitor.
Stergiou GS; Karpettas N; Kollias A; Destounis A; Tzamouranis D
J Hum Hypertens; 2012 Apr; 26(4):220-7. PubMed ID: 21900952
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Validation of the noninvasive assessment of central blood pressure by the SphygmoCor and Omron devices against the invasive catheter measurement.
Ding FH; Fan WX; Zhang RY; Zhang Q; Li Y; Wang JG
Am J Hypertens; 2011 Dec; 24(12):1306-11. PubMed ID: 21976274
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Calibration of blood pressure data after replacement of the standard mercury sphygmomanometer by an oscillometric device and concurrent change of cuffs.
Neuhauser HK; Ellert U; Thamm M; Adler C
Blood Press Monit; 2015 Feb; 20(1):39-42. PubMed ID: 25144600
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Validation of the Microlife Watch BP Office professional device for office blood pressure measurement according to the International protocol.
Stergiou GS; Tzamouranis D; Protogerou A; Nasothimiou E; Kapralos C
Blood Press Monit; 2008 Oct; 13(5):299-303. PubMed ID: 18799957
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Blood pressure randomized methodology study comparing automatic oscillometric and mercury sphygmomanometer devices: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2009-2010.
Ostchega Y; Zhang G; Sorlie P; Hughes JP; Reed-Gillette DS; Nwankwo T; Yoon S
Natl Health Stat Report; 2012 Oct; (59):1-15. PubMed ID: 24984529
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Cluster-randomized controlled trial of oscillometric vs. manual sphygmomanometer for blood pressure management in primary care (CRAB).
Nelson MR; Quinn S; Bowers-Ingram L; Nelson JM; Winzenberg TM
Am J Hypertens; 2009 Jun; 22(6):598-603. PubMed ID: 19300424
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. [Oscillometric wrist devices: comparison with the standard mercury sphygmomanometer and estimate of the "supine" error].
Caridi G; Zoccali C; Enia G
G Ital Nefrol; 2003; 20(6):589-91. PubMed ID: 14732910
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Arm position and blood pressure: a risk factor for hypertension?
Mourad A; Carney S; Gillies A; Jones B; Nanra R; Trevillian P
J Hum Hypertens; 2003 Jun; 17(6):389-95. PubMed ID: 12764401
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. The impact of pulse pressure on the accuracy of wrist blood pressure measurement.
Westhoff TH; Schmidt S; Meissner R; Zidek W; van der Giet M
J Hum Hypertens; 2009 Jun; 23(6):391-5. PubMed ID: 19092843
[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. [Green study: quality of blood pressure measurement by general practitioners].
Labaki G; Grès CS; Darné B; Bassous M; Asmar R
Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss; 2002; 95(7-8):713-7. PubMed ID: 12365085
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
