MEDLINE/PubMed Journal Browser Search

Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

Title: [Assessement of home blood pressure with a monitor including MAM technology: comparison with the standard monitor].
Author: Dourmap-Collas C, Villeneuve F, Jaboureck O, Chantrel F, Hanon O, Girerd X, Club des jeunes hypertensiologues.
Journal: Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss; 2006; 99(7-8):754-7. PubMed ID: 17061459.
Abstract:
OBJECTIVES: To compare two periods of three days of home blood pressure monitoring (HBPM) using two different monitors with one including MAM (microlife average mode) technology. METHODS: In 152 hypertensive subjects referred to hypertension specialists, a self-measurement of blood pressure was performed sequentially with an Omron M6 (arm cuff, A/A, BHS validation) or Microlife BP-3AC1 with the MAM technology. Each patient recorded home blood pressure during two periods of 3 days with 3 measures in the morning and 3 in the evening. Order for use of each monitor was randomised. BP values were reported on a standardized document. RESULTS: In this population, aged 60 +/- 14 years, with 57% of men and a mean blood pressure of 150 +/- 21/84 +/- 21 mmHg, the home blood pressure values were 141.5 +/- 18.7/79.9 +/- 9.6 mmHg with the OMRON monitor and 138.2 +/- 17.1/79.9 +/- 10.1 mmHg with the Microlife monitor. Values between the two monitors differed about 5 mmHg for the mean SBP and about 2.8 mmHg for the mean DBP. The mean HBPM values does not differ between the two methods for more than 2.5 mmHg, 5 mmHg, 10 mmHg and 15 mmHg in 29%, 49%, 80% and 90% for SBP and in 42%, 76%, 94% and 98% for DBP respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For most of patients, mean SBP/DBP obtained with home blood pressure Measurement during three days are comparable when using monitor operated with MAM technology or not.

[Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]