A Comparative Study of Blood Pressure Recording from Conventional Mercury Spyhgmomanometer to Recording from Aneroid and Digital Device in Healthy Volunteers

Article Sidebar

PDF
Published: Mar 22, 2022
DOI: https://doi.org/10.55184/ijpas.v72i1.30
Keywords:
Blood pressure mercury sphygmomanometer aneroid manometer digital manometer

Main Article Content

Asha Shekhar
Associate Professor, Department of Physiology, Mysore Medical college & Research Institute , Mysore, Karnataka
Sadiqua Begum
Department of Physiology, Mysore Medical college & Research Institute, Mysore, Karnataka
Sumanth Mallikarjuna Majgi
Assistant Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Mysore Medical college & Research Institute, Mysore, Karnataka

Abstract

Introduction: Measurement of blood pressure accurately is of  utmost importance in detection of hypertension and monitoring a wide range of clinical conditions.  The use of mercury sphygmomanometer, which was considered gold standard is declining due to the environmental concerns. Since the use of non mercury devices has increased , the accuracy of these devices needs to be ascertained. Hence, this study was conducted.                        


Aims & Objectives : To measure and compare the blood pressure recordings using  mercury sphygmomanometer ,aneroid and digital apparatus.                                                       


 Materials and Methods : This cross sectional study was conducted on 102 first year MBBS students of MMC & RI, Mysore, aged between 18 & 20 years ,who voluntarily agreed .  Blood Pressure was recorded using mercury manometer, followed by aneroid and then by digital apparatus  giving 5 minutes interval between the recordings .Data  was analyzed using appropriate statistical methods.                                        


Results : The mean SBP by Mercury , aneroid and digital manometers was 108.58 ± 10.68 , 107.11 ± 12.41 and 116.5 ± 13.54 respectively. Mean DBP by Mercury , aneroid and   digital manometers were 71.84 ± 7.44 , 72.94 ± 7.95 and 75.39 ± 8.71 respectively. There was no statistically significant difference except with the DBP recordings of aneroid & digital apparatus , which had a `p` value  of .002.                                                                       


Conclusion : The systolic and diastolic BP measured by these apparatus (mercury , aneroid  & digital) are comparable and can be used interchangeably in practice.

Article Details

How to Cite
Shekhar, A., Begum, S., & Majgi, S. M. (2022). A Comparative Study of Blood Pressure Recording from Conventional Mercury Spyhgmomanometer to Recording from Aneroid and Digital Device in Healthy Volunteers. INDIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY AND ALLIED SCIENCES, 72(1). https://doi.org/10.55184/ijpas.v72i1.30
Issue
Vol. 72 No. 1 (2020): INDIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY AND ALLIED SCIENCES
Section
Editorial / Perspectives

References

Developing national strategies for phasing out mercury-containing thermometers and sphygmomanometers in health care, including in the context of the Minamata Convention on Mercury. Key considerations and step-by-step guidance. Geneva:World Health Organization( 2015).

Igbokwe Ugochukwu Vincent, Ejike Daniel Eze, Moses Dele Adams, Mazi Ikechukwu, Denen Atsukwei, Karimah Mohammed Rabiu, Adam Moyosore Afodun (2018). Comparative Study of Different Blood Pressure Measuring Instruments in Human. Advances in Biomedical Sciences. 2018; 3: 21-29.

Kakkad KM, Damor P, Parmar B, Patel S, Prajapti V, Dhivar N (2016). Comparative Study of Blood Pressure Measurement by Aneroid and Digital manual Sphygmomanometer. Ntl J Community Med 2016; 7(8):700-702.

Kaplan NM (1998). Commentary on the sixth report of Joint National Committee (JNC-6). Am J Hypertens 1998; 11:134-136.

Kearny PM, Whelton M, Reynold s K, Muntner P, Whelton PK, He J (2005). Global burden of hypertension: analysis of worldwide data. Lancet 2005; 365(9455) : 217-223.

Lim SS,Vos T, Flaxman AD, Danaei G, Shibuya K, Adair Rohani H et al (2010). A comparative risk assessment of burden of disease & injury attributable to 67 risk factors & risk factor clusters in 21 regions ,1990-2010: a systemic analysis of Disease study 2010. Lancet 2013; 380: 2224-60.

Ma Y, Temprosa M, Fowler S, Ronald J. Prineas, Maria G. Montez, et al (2009). Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Evaluating the accuracy of an aneroid sphygmomanometer in a clinical trial setting. Am J Hypertens. 2009; 22(3):263-266.

Markandu ND, Whitcher F, Arnold A and Carney C (2000). The mercury sphygmomanometer should be abandoned before it is proscribed .J Hum Hypertens 2000 Jan; 14:31–36.

Minemata convention on mercury (2013). United Nations Environment Programme; 2013.

O’Brien E et al.(1993). The British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens 1993; 11 (Supplement 2): S43–S63.

Ostchega Y, Prineas R J, Nwankwo T, Zipf G (2011). Assessing Blood pressure accuracy of an aneroid sphygmomanometer in a national survey environment. Am J Hypertens 2011 Mar; 24(3): 322-327.

Shahbabu B, Dasgupta A, Sarkar K and Sahoo S.K (2016). Which is more accurate in measuring the blood pressure ? A Digital or an Aneroid Sphygmomanometer. J Clin Diagn Res 2016;10(3): 11-14.

Shimek JAM, Emmanuel J, Orris P, Chartier Y, editors (2011). Replacement of mercury thermometers and sphygmomanometers in health care. Technical guidance. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2011.

Singh SB, Kumar D, Kashyap V, Singh S (2020). A comparative study of automated blood pressure device and mercury LED blood pressure device using Lin`s concordance correlation coefficient and other validity measures in Indian population. J Family Med Prim Care 2020; 9:1464-69.