These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
281 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31658107)
1. 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]
2. 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]
3. Blood pressure measurement in pediatric population: comparison between automated oscillometric devices and mercury sphygmomanometers-a systematic review and meta-analysis. Araujo-Moura K; Souza LG; Mello GL; De Moraes ACF Eur J Pediatr; 2022 Jan; 181(1):9-22. PubMed ID: 34272985 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Comparison of oscillometric blood pressure measurements at the wrist with an upper-arm auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer. Rogers P; Burke V; Stroud P; Puddey IB Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol; 1999; 26(5-6):477-81. PubMed ID: 10386242 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. 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]
6. 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]
7. Oscillometric and auscultatory blood pressure measurement methods in children: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Duncombe SL; Voss C; Harris KC J Hypertens; 2017 Feb; 35(2):213-224. PubMed ID: 27870656 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. 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]
9. 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]
10. Comparison of the automated non-invasive oscillometric blood pressure monitor (BpTRU) with the auscultatory mercury sphygmomanometer in a paediatric population. Mattu GS; Heran BS; Wright JM Blood Press Monit; 2004 Feb; 9(1):39-45. PubMed ID: 15021077 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. Accuracy of automated blood pressure measurements in the presence of atrial fibrillation: systematic review and meta-analysis. Clark CE; McDonagh STJ; McManus RJ J Hum Hypertens; 2019 May; 33(5):352-364. PubMed ID: 30631126 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. 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]
13. Comparisons of auscultatory hybrid and automated sphygmomanometers with mercury sphygmomanometry in hypertensive and normotensive pregnant women: parallel validation studies. Davis GK; Roberts LM; Mangos GJ; Brown MA J Hypertens; 2015 Mar; 33(3):499-505; discussion 505-6. PubMed ID: 25380148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Assessing the validity of oscillometric device for blood pressure measurement in a large population-based epidemiologic study. Chen Z; Wang X; Wang Z; Zhang L; Hao G; Dong Y; Zhu M; Gao R; J Am Soc Hypertens; 2017 Nov; 11(11):730-736.e4. PubMed ID: 29032943 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. 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]
16. 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]
17. Disagreement of the two oscillometric blood pressure measurement devices, Datascope Accutorr Plus and Omron HEM-705CP II, and bidirectional conversion of blood pressure values. Adler C; Ellert U; Neuhauser HK Blood Press Monit; 2014 Apr; 19(2):109-17. PubMed ID: 24583967 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]