ArticleAnnals of African medicine
Impact of operator hearing threshold on manual blood pressure measurement.
Article in Annals of African medicine. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- The Japanese Society of Hypertension Guidelines for the Management of Hypertension (JSH 2019).Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2019Guideline
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionUne déficience auditive non détectée chez le personnel de santé pourrait affecter leur capacité à obtenir une pression artérielle (PA) précise avec des conséquences négatives sur les soins aux patients. Le but de cet article était de déterminer l'impact de l'audition de l'opérateur sur la mesure manuelle de la pression artérielle. Méthodologie: Une étude transversale portant sur 25 patients et 60 personnel de santé composé de 25 médecins (groupe 1), 25 infirmières (groupe 2) et 10 10 personnes qualifiées sélectionnées ayant une audition normale formé (groupe 3). Personnel du groupe 3 on mesurée le PA de chaque patient, ce qui a été jugé exact. Après une formation préliminaire sur la technique de mesure de la PA, une personne Des groupes 1 et 2 ont mesuré la PA d'un patient en utilisant la technique d'auscultation manuelle et ont ensuite procédé à un dépistage du ton pur Audiométrie (PTA) avec le seuil de la meilleure oreille auditive enregistrée. Résultats: La majorité du personnel avait une audition normale (PTA ≤25 dB), 22% Avait un seuil d'audition> 25 dB au dépistage, avec une perte auditive débilitante notée chez une seule personne (2%). Il y avait un accord complet dans les mesures entre les participants ayant un seuil auditif ≤25 dB et le groupe témoin, mais chez les participants dont le seuil est> 25 dB, 100% Ont enregistré une PA diastolique inexacte et 64% ont enregistré une PA systolique inexacte avec tendance à sous-estimer la tension systolique et à surestimer la tension diastolique.
conclusionLa déficience auditive n'est pas rare chez le personnel de santé, ce qui entraîne des enregistrements inexacts de la PA. Les audiogrammes doivent être obtenu chaque fois que le personnel de santé remarque des différences fréquentes dans la mesure de la PA par rapport aux collègues. Formation sur la mesure de la PA a permis une mesure précise de la pression artérielle par tous les participants normaux de l'audition. Résumé Introduction: Undetected hearing impairment among health personnel could affect their ability to obtain accurate blood pressure (BP) measurements with consequent negative impact on patient care. The aim of this paper was to determine the impact of operator hearing threshold on manual BP measurement. METHODOLOGY: A cross-sectional study involving 25 patients and 60 health personnel consisting of 25 doctors (Group 1), 25 nurses (Group 2), and 10 specially selected, normal hearing and trained control group (Group 3). Group 3 personnel measured BP of each patient and this was considered accurate. After preliminary training on BP measurement technique, one person each from Groups 1 and 2 measured BP of a patient using manual auscultation technique and then proceeded to have a screening pure tone audiogram (PTA) with threshold of the best hearing ear recorded.
resultsMajority of personnel had normal hearing (PTA ≤25 dB), 22% had hearing threshold >25 dB on screening, with debilitating hearing loss noted in one person (2%). There was a complete agreement in BP measurements between participants with hearing threshold ≤25 dB and the control group, but in participants with threshold >25 dB, 100% recorded inaccurate diastolic BP and 64% recorded inaccurate systolic BP with tendency to underestimate systolic and overestimate diastolic BP.
conclusionHearing impairment is not uncommon among health personnel, resulting in inaccurate BP recordings. Audiograms should be obtained whenever health personnel notice frequent differences in measured BP compared to colleagues. Training on BP measurement technique resulted in accurate BP measurement by all normal hearing participants.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.