449 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 22781634)
1. Comparison of blood pressure measurements between an automated oscillometric device and a Hawksley random-zero sphygmomanometer in the northern Sweden MONICA study.
Eriksson M; Carlberg B; Jansson JH
Blood Press Monit; 2012 Aug; 17(4):164-70. PubMed ID: 22781634
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. 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]
3. Algorithms for converting random-zero to automated oscillometric blood pressure values, and vice versa.
Stang A; Moebus S; Möhlenkamp S; Dragano N; Schmermund A; Beck EM; Siegrist J; Erbel R; Jöckel KH;
Am J Epidemiol; 2006 Jul; 164(1):85-94. PubMed ID: 16675536
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. 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]
5. Accuracy of oscillometric devices in children and adults.
Chiolero A; Paradis G; Lambert M
Blood Press; 2010 Aug; 19(4):254-9. PubMed ID: 20156034
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. 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]
7. 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]
8. Oscillometric estimation of central blood pressure: validation of the Mobil-O-Graph in comparison with the SphygmoCor device.
Weiss W; Gohlisch C; Harsch-Gladisch C; Tölle M; Zidek W; van der Giet M
Blood Press Monit; 2012 Jun; 17(3):128-31. PubMed ID: 22561735
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. Can an automatic oscillometric device replace a mercury sphygmomanometer on blood pressure measurement? a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Park SH; Park YS
Blood Press Monit; 2019 Dec; 24(6):265-276. PubMed ID: 31658107
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Accuracy of an oscillometric automatic blood pressure device: the Omron HEM403C.
Walma EP; van Dooren C; van der Does E; Prins A; Mulder P; Hoes AW
J Hum Hypertens; 1995 Mar; 9(3):169-74. PubMed ID: 7783097
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Comparison of noninvasive oscillometric and intra-arterial blood pressure measurements in hyperacute stroke.
Manios E; Vemmos K; Tsivgoulis G; Barlas G; Koroboki E; Spengos K; Zakopoulos N
Blood Press Monit; 2007 Jun; 12(3):149-56. PubMed ID: 17496464
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Auscultatory versus oscillometric measurement of blood pressure in octogenarians.
Rosholm JU; Arnspang S; Matzen L; Jacobsen IA
Blood Press; 2012 Oct; 21(5):269-72. PubMed ID: 22545576
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Validation of the Omron M7 (HEM-780-E) oscillometric blood pressure monitoring device according to the British Hypertension Society protocol.
Coleman A; Steel S; Freeman P; de Greeff A; Shennan A
Blood Press Monit; 2008 Feb; 13(1):49-54. PubMed ID: 18199924
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Blood pressure in children aged 4-8 years: comparison of Omron HEM 711 and sphygmomanometer blood pressure measurements.
Midgley PC; Wardhaugh B; Macfarlane C; Magowan R; Kelnar CJ
Arch Dis Child; 2009 Dec; 94(12):955-8. PubMed ID: 19608553
[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. 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]
18. 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]
19. Validation of the Omron M5-I, R5-I and HEM-907 automated blood pressure monitors in elderly individuals according to the International Protocol of the European Society of Hypertension.
Omboni S; Riva I; Giglio A; Caldara G; Groppelli A; Parati G
Blood Press Monit; 2007 Aug; 12(4):233-42. PubMed ID: 17625396
[TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. 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]
[Next] [New Search]
