Objective. To validate two monitors on the market for self-measurement of blood pressure (SMBP), an automatic one (OMRON HEM-705 CP) and a semi-automatic one (OMRON M1).Design. Descriptive study of validation of diagnostic tests.Setting. Primary care. San Pablo University Health Centre, Sevilla.Participants. 85 individuals (20 men and 65 women) with a wide range of age and blood pressure (BP), belonging to the population attended at the health centre or to its staff. People with arrhythmia and Korotkoff's V phase close to zero were excluded. Main measurements and results. BP and cardiac frequency (CF) measurements obtained with the SMBP devices to be validated were compared with readings on a mercury sphygmomanometer, used as the standard method. The differences between the SMBP devices and the gold standard were quantified and are presented on the scale proposed by the protocol of the British Hypertension Society (BHS). The mean (SD) of the systolic BP differences (in mm Hg) between the devices evaluated and the standard device was 1.084.73 for the automatic monitor and 1.255.30 for the semi-automatic one. The mean differences of diastolic BP were 0.444.03 for the automatic monitor, and 0.513.90 for the semi-automatic one. The cumulative percentage differences of systolic/ diastolic BP5, 10 and 15 mm Hg were 85.5, 98, 98.8/90.6, 98.4, 100% for the automatic monitor and 82.7, 95.7, 98.8/91, 99.6, 100% for the semi-automatic one. This supposes a Grade A on the BHS procedure, which is maintained on analysis of the results by blood pressure rankings. Conclusion. As both monitors meet the internationally accepted validation criteria, they can be recommended for the monitoring and self-monitoring of BP in patients with hypertension.
Bonilla, P. I., Sánchez, E. M., Peralta, J. L., Oquendo, M. I., Alcalá, F. V., & Domínguez, A. C. (2002). Validation of two systems of self-measurement of blood pressure, the OMRON HEM-705 CP and OMRON M1 (HEM 422C2-E) models. Atencion Primaria / Sociedad Española de Medicina de Familia y Comunitaria, 30(1), 22–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0212-6567(02)78959-2