ArticleStroke (Hoboken, N.J.)2023
Manual and Oscillometric Blood Pressure in tPA-Treated Acute Ischemic Stroke: What Constitutes Agreement?
Article in Stroke (Hoboken, N.J.), 2023. 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
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Automatic noninvasive oscillometric blood pressure (NIBP) devices measure mean arterial pressure (MAP); systolic and diastolic blood pressure (SBP, DBP) are algorithmically derived from MAP. The most invalid NIBP measure is SBP, yet stroke practitioners use it to manage blood pressure (BP) in accordance with thrombolysis guidelines. We determined agreement between SBP, DBP, and MAP measured manually and by NIBP in patients treated with alteplase. Methods: A multisite prospective observational study of NIBP and manual BP agreement was conducted in patients treated with alteplase immediately after bolus and infusion initiation using methods established in guidelines for the assessment of device agreement. Dual auscultatory stethoscopes were used by 2 investigators to ensure agreement with each manual BP variable and MAP was calculated using the standard formula for manual BP measures. Data were analyzed using Bland-Altman analyses and Lin concordance correlation coefficient. Results: A total of 7 hospitals participated, collecting 5 sets of manual/NIBP BPs in 95 patients treated with alteplase (475 paired measures). Range in limits of agreement were SBP: -28.91 to 21.41 mmHg with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient 0.8; DBP: -21.0 to 19.0 mmHg with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient 0.69; and MAP: -27.5 to 16.5 mmHg with Lin's concordance correlation coefficient 0.7. There was no difference in device agreement by BP device manufacturer brand. Differences in SBP, DBP, and MAP between NIBP and manual sphygmomanometry failed to reach guideline recommendations requiring 80% of measures to fall within a 5 mmHg difference and 95% of measures to fall within a 10 mmHg difference. Conclusion: NIBP devices produce significantly different BP measures then manual sphygmomanometry auscultated BP. Because NIBP devices rely on the MAP and do not directly measure SBP and DBP, definition of what constitutes safe MAP boundaries in patients treated with alteplase should be determined when automatic BP measurement is used in clinical practice.
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.