Smartphone-Based versus Non-Invasive Automatic Oscillometric Brachial Cuff Blood Pressure Measurements: A Prospective Method Comparison Volunteer Study.

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_F4CBA3620D4A
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Titre
Smartphone-Based versus Non-Invasive Automatic Oscillometric Brachial Cuff Blood Pressure Measurements: A Prospective Method Comparison Volunteer Study.
Périodique
Journal of personalized medicine
Auteur⸱e⸱s
Delmotte L., Desebbe O., Alexander B., Kouz K., Coeckelenbergh S., Schoettker P., Turgay T., Joosten A.
ISSN
2075-4426 (Print)
ISSN-L
2075-4426
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
21/12/2023
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
14
Numéro
1
Pages
15
Langue
anglais
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: epublish
Résumé
Introduction: Mobile health diagnostics have demonstrated effectiveness in detecting and managing chronic diseases. This method comparison study aims to assess the accuracy and precision of the previously evaluated OptiBP™ technology over a four-week study period. This device uses optical signals recorded by placing a patient's fingertip on a smartphone's camera to estimate blood pressure (BP). Methods: In adult participants without cardiac arrhythmias and minimal interarm blood pressure difference (systolic arterial pressure (SAP) < 15 mmHg or diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) < 10 mmHg), three pairs of 30 s BP measurements with the OptiBP™ (test method) were simultaneously compared using three pairs of measurements with the non-invasive oscillometric brachial cuff (reference method) on the opposite arm over a period of four consecutive weeks at a rate of two measurements per week (one in the morning and one in the afternoon). The agreement of BP values between the two technologies was analyzed using Bland-Altman and error grid analyses. The performance of the smartphone application was investigated using the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) definitions, which require the bias ± standard deviation (SD) between two technologies to be lower than 5 ± 8 mmHg. Results: Among the 65 eligible volunteers, 53 participants had adequate OptiBP™ BP values. In 12 patients, no OptiBP™ BP could be measured due to inadequate signals. Only nine participants had known chronic arterial hypertension and 76% of those patients were treated. The mean bias ± SD between both technologies was -1.4 mmHg ± 10.1 mmHg for systolic arterial pressure (SAP), 0.2 mmHg ± 6.5 mmHg for diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) and -0.5 mmHg ± 6.9 mmHg for mean arterial pressure (MAP). Error grid analyses indicated that 100% of the pairs of BP measurements were located in zones A (no risk) and B (low risk). Conclusions: In a cohort of volunteers, we observed an acceptable agreement between BP values obtained with the OptiBP <sup>TM</sup> and those obtained with the reference method over a four-week period. The OptiBP <sup>TM</sup> fulfills the ISO standards for MAP and DAP (but not SAP). The error grid analyses showed that 100% measurements were located in risk zones A and B. Despite the need for some technological improvements, this application may become an important tool to measure BP in the future.
Mots-clé
accuracy, arterial hypertension, arterial pressure, blood pressure, digital health, mobile health, mobile phone, precision
Pubmed
Web of science
Open Access
Oui
Création de la notice
29/01/2024 16:03
Dernière modification de la notice
13/02/2024 8:23
Données d'usage