ArticleCurrent health sciences journal
Comparison of Blood Pressure Measurement Results from Two Different Regions (Upper Arm and Ankle).
Article in Current health sciences journal. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThis study was conducted to determine the clinical concordance of non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements from the upper arm and ankle and to determine whether there is a difference between them.
methodsA prospective and cross-sectional research design was used in this study. The study population included 106 patients hospitalized in the surgical clinics of a training and research hospital. Non-invasive blood pressure measurements were performed from both upper arms and ankles in the supine position. In the data analysis, ANOVA and the Bland-Altman plot were employed.
resultsBased on the results of NIBP measurements from the arm and ankle, the differences between diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and mean blood pressure (MBP) were acceptable and within the limits of concordance. The difference between the mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) was found to be significantly different and outside the limits of concordance. The difference between the mean SBP measured from the ankle and the upper arm was determined to be 18 mmHg.
conclusionIt was determined that the results of SBP measured from the ankle were significantly higher and outside the limits of concordance compared to the upper arm, while the results of DBP and MBP measurements were within acceptable limits.
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.