Validation of a remote monitoring blood pressure device in a general population cohort
Rattachement africain : us. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
BACKGROUND: Remote blood pressure (BP) monitoring has emerged as a promising solution to overcome barriers to hypertension care access, yet validation of devices is lacking. METHODS: We conducted the validation of the Ideal Life BP Manager BP device, a remote BP monitoring device, using the AAMI/ESH/ISO protocol. From June 2021 to May 2022, participants were screened and systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP) measurements were conducted by trained staff using the Ideal Life BP Manager and a mercury sphygmomanometer. Statistical analyses were performed to assess agreement of SBP and DBP. RESULTS: Of the 90 individuals screened, 79 were included, with a mean age of 50.9 years (standard deviation [SD] 15.6) and the majority being female (68.8%). The mean ± SD differences between the Ideal Life BP Manager and mercury sphygmomanometer measurements were 2.20 ± 7.37 mm Hg for SBP and 1.49 ± 7.31 mm Hg for DBP, satisfying AAMI/ESH/ISO protocol criterion 1. Criterion 2 was also met, with participant-level standard deviations of the mean paired differences (6.54 mm Hg for SBP, 6.30 mm Hg for DBP) falling below the protocol-specified thresholds. Bland-Altman plots demonstrated limits of agreement of -12.0 to 16.9 mm Hg for systolic blood pressure and -12.8 to 15.9 mm Hg for diastolic blood pressure. CONCLUSIONS: The Ideal Life BP Manager met the AAMI/ESH/ISO validation criteria.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Validation of a remote monitoring blood pressure device in a general population cohort
- Date Crossref
- 19/06/2026
- Éditeur
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Où se fait cette recherche
-
University of Alabama at Birmingham Center for Women’s Reproductive Health pays non établi dans la noticeUniversité ou école supérieure
-
Pediatric Nephrology of Alabama pays non établi dans la noticeÉtablissement de santé
Center for Women’s Reproductive Health — University of Alabama at Birmingham et Pediatric Nephrology of Alabama.
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.