Home blood pressure measurement self-reporting in real-life practices using the Hy-Result app: self-monitoring and digital pathway.

Background: Little real-life information is available on the clinical characteristics of information and communication technologies (ICTs) users, particularly in the context of hypertension and home blood pressure measurement (HBPM). This retrospective observational study describes HBPM practices obtained through the Hy-Result® system, a validated app designed to help patients perform HBPM and understand their results through an automatic interpretation of the readings using web interface. Methods: We analyzed 19,176 HBPM reports (sequence of 1 to 7 days of measurements; 3 in the morning, 3 in the evening) collected in real life circumstances from two groups of users: primary care (Prim) and hypertension center (Hosp). Results: Population: among the 19,176 reports, 63.2% declared receiving antihypertensive medication, having diabetes (15.2%), chronic kidney disease (9.7%) or history of stroke (7.6%). Treated users were older than normotensives [mean ± standard deviation (SD) age 64±12 vs. 58±14 years] with higher prevalence of comorbidities. Compliance with the HBPM schedule: the majority of reports (90.2%) totaled 15 systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) readings or more, of which 96.1% were Hosp users and 89.3% Prim users, with a significant difference between both groups (P<0.001). The compliance rate for 7 days of measurement was higher in the Hosp group (57.6% vs. 30.5%; P<0.001). Blood pressure (BP) levels: in the 17,289 reports with a minimum of 15 readings, 42.7% had an average SBP and/or DBP above the recommended thresholds (below 135 and/or 85 mmHg), among whom, 36.8% were untreated subjects. Hosp users had better BP control than Prim (P<0.001). Users that are followed in the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) excellence center (Hosp) had better BP control than those in a Prim setting (P<0.001). HBPM oscillometric devices: in both groups, treated patients and untreated users, used the arm cuff devices more frequently than the wrist device. Conclusions: Our real-life study shows that 90% of the HBPM reports include the required minimum number of BP readings to allow the calculation of a reliable average among whom 40% have uncontrolled BP levels. The self-management Hy-Result web app demonstrates significant potential for inclusion in the patient care process and reinforces the patient's engagement to independently monitor and self-reported their BP. When the mean BP is not within the recommended range, the users were automatically prompted by text messages to seek medical advice by the software. Further research should determine the extent to which users adhere to text messages advice.

Efficacy and safety of a single-pill versus free combination of perindopril/indapamide/amlodipine: a multicenter, randomized, double-blind study in Chinese patients with hypertension.

BACKGROUND: In China, the prevalence of hypertension is high and the use of combination antihypertensive therapy is low, which contributes to inadequate blood pressure (BP) control. The availability of simplified treatments combining complementary BP-lowering agents may help more patients achieve their goals. METHODS: This Phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority study included Chinese adults with mild-to-moderate hypertension. Following a 1-month run-in on perindopril/indapamide bi-therapy, patients with uncontrolled systolic/diastolic BP (≥140/90 mmHg) were randomized to perindopril 5 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg/amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind/Aml) single-pill combination (SPC) or perindopril 4 mg/indapamide 1.25 mg plus amlodipine 5 mg (Per/Ind + Aml) for 6 months. Uptitration was permitted from month 2 onwards. The primary efficacy objective was the noninferiority of Per/Ind/Aml in lowering office systolic BP at 2 months. The secondary objectives included the effectiveness of SPC on diastolic BP, uptitration efficacy, and office BP control (systolic/diastolic <140/90 mmHg). A subgroup of patients participated in 24-h ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM). RESULTS: A total of 532 patients were randomized: Per/Ind/Aml (n = 262) and Per/Ind + Aml (n = 269). Overall, the mean (±SD) age was 55.7 ±â€Š8.8 years, 60.7% were male, and the mean office systolic/diastolic BP at baseline on Per/Ind was 150.4/97.2 mmHg. Systolic BP decreased in both groups at 2 months from baseline: -14.99 ±â€Š14.46 mmHg Per/Ind/Aml versus -14.49 ±â€Š12.87 mmHg Per/Ind +Aml. A predefined noninferiority margin of 4 mmHg was observed (P < 0.001). The effectiveness of the Per/Ind/Aml SPC was also demonstrated for all secondary endpoints. ABPM demonstrated sustained BP control over 24 h. Both treatments were well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: Per/Ind/Aml is an effective substitute for Per/Ind + Aml, providing at least equivalent BP control over 24 h in a single pill, with comparable safety.

Cardio-ankle vascular index for predicting cardiovascular morbimortality and determinants for its progression in the prospective advanced approach to arterial stiffness (TRIPLE-A-Stiffness) study.

BACKGROUND: The cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI) measure of arterial stiffness is associated with prevalent cardiovascular risk factors, while its predictive value for cardiovascular events remains to be established. The aim was to determine associations of CAVI with cardiovascular morbimortality (primary outcome) and all-cause mortality (secondary outcome), and to establish the determinants of CAVI progression. METHODS: TRIPLE-A-Stiffness, an international multicentre prospective longitudinal study, enrolled >2000 subjects ≥40 years old at 32 centres from 18 European countries. Of these, 1250 subjects (55% women) were followed for a median of 3.82 (2.81-4.69) years. FINDINGS: Unadjusted cumulative incidence rates of outcomes according to CAVI stratification were higher in highest stratum (CAVI > 9). Cox regression with adjustment for age, sex, and cardiovascular risk factors revealed that CAVI was associated with increased cardiovascular morbimortality (HR 1.25 per 1 increase; 95% confidence interval, CI: 1.03-1.51) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.37 per 1 increase; 95% CI: 1.10-1.70) risk in subjects ≥60 years. In ROC analyses, CAVI optimal threshold was 9.25 (c-index 0.598; 0.542-0.654) and 8.30 (c-index 0.565; 0.512-0.618) in subjects ≥ or <60 years, respectively, to predict increased CV morbimortality. Finally, age, mean arterial blood pressure, anti-diabetic and lipid-lowering treatment were independent predictors of yearly CAVI progression adjusted for baseline CAVI. INTERPRETATION: The present study identified additional value for CAVI to predict outcomes after adjustment for CV risk factors, in particular for subjects ≥60 years. CAVI progression may represent a modifiable risk factor by treatments. FUNDING: International Society of Vascular Health (ISVH) and Fukuda Denshi, Japan.

Assessment and management of exaggerated blood pressure response to standing and orthostatic hypertension: consensus statement by the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability.

Recent evidence suggests that an exaggerated blood pressure (BP) response to standing (ERTS) is associated with an increased risk of adverse outcomes, both in young and old individuals. In addition, ERTS has been shown to be an independent predictor of masked hypertension. In the vast majority of studies reporting on the prognostic value of orthostatic hypertension (OHT), the definition was based only on systolic office BP measurements. This consensus statement provides recommendations on the assessment and management of individuals with ERTS and/or OHT. ERTS is defined as an orthostatic increase in SBP at least 20 mmHg and OHT as an ERTS with standing SBP at least 140 mmHg. This statement recommends a standardized methodology to assess ERTS, by considering body and arm position, and the number and timing of BP measurements. ERTS/OHT should be confirmed in a second visit, to account for its limited reproducibility. The second assessment should evaluate BP changes from the supine to the standing posture. Ambulatory BP monitoring is recommended in most individuals with ERTS/OHT, especially if they have high-normal seated office BP. Implementation of lifestyle changes and close follow-up are recommended in individuals with ERTS/OHT and normotensive seated office BP. Whether antihypertensive treatment should be administered in the latter is unknown. Hypertensive patients with ERTS/OHT should be managed as any other hypertensive patient. Standardized standing BP measurement should be implemented in future epidemiological and interventional studies.

Vascular Health Promotion Project and Vascular Medicine in China-CCVM2004-2023.

Cardiovascular disease(CVD) has become a major disease burden affecting people's health in China. Blood vessels are very important for human health and are the "sentinel" for the development of many cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases. The key to effectively preventing fatal, disabling heart, brain and peripheral vascular events lies in controlling traditional and non-traditional risk factors for vascular health from the source, and early assessment and intervention of early vascular lesions. Since 2004, China government promoted the early detection technology of vascular lesions and vascular medicine, and proposed the Beijing Vascular Health Stratification (BVHS) to provide suggestions for the examination, evaluation and management of risk factors, and to provide new ideas for lifelong maintenance of vascular health. This review mainly introduces the establishment and development of the clinical discipline of "vascular medicine" in the past 20 years in China, introduces the indicators for detecting vascular function and structure and the predictive value of vascular events, and carries out intelligent and digital management of vascular health throughout the life cycle of individualized prevention, treatment and rehabilitation for people with different parts or degrees of lesions, effectively reducing the occurrence and development of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular diseases, and the prospect of new technology in maintaining vascular health.

Validation of the Withings BPM Core Device for Self-Blood Pressure Measurements in General Population According to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard.

Background: Most of the scientific societies recommend assessing the accuracy of electronic devices for blood pressure (BP) measurements using established validation protocol. Objective: To determine the accuracy of the BP measurements using the Withings BPM Core device in the general population according to the "Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020)". Methods: The Withings BPM Core is an oscillometric device measuring BP at the brachial level. The study was performed according to the "Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020) protocol" using the same-arm sequential BP measurement method. Subjects (n ≥ 85) fulfilling the age, gender, BP, and cuff distribution criteria of the protocol were included. Analysis was performed as required by the Universal protocol using Criterion 1 - differences between observers' mercury sphygmomanometer reference measurements and test device BP values (test versus reference) and their standard deviation (SD); and Criterion 2 - The SD of the mean BP differences between the test device and reference BP per subject. Results: Eighty-six subjects were selected, 85 of whom were included. The mean BP differences between the simultaneous two observers' measurements were -0.2 ± 2.1 mmHg for systolic BP (SBP) and 0.3 ± 2.1 mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP). For validation criterion 1, the mean difference ± SD between the reference and device BP values was -0.6 ± 4.8 mmHg for SBP and 0.1 ± 3.7 mmHg for DBP (≤5 ± 8 mmHg for both SBP and DBP). For criterion 2, the SD of the mean BP differences between the test device and reference BP per subject was 3.2/2.6 mmHg for SBP and DBP (≤6.91/6.95 mmHg). Conclusion: The results of this study showed that the Withings BPM Core oscillometric device for home BP measurement fulfilled the accuracy requirements of the (ISO 81060-2:2018/AMD 1:2020) Universal protocol in the general population.

European Society of Hypertension recommendations for the validation of cuffless blood pressure measuring devices: European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability.

BACKGROUND: There is intense effort to develop cuffless blood pressure (BP) measuring devices, and several are already on the market claiming that they provide accurate measurements. These devices are heterogeneous in measurement principle, intended use, functions, and calibration, and have special accuracy issues requiring different validation than classic cuff BP monitors. To date, there are no generally accepted protocols for their validation to ensure adequate accuracy for clinical use. OBJECTIVE: This statement by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability recommends procedures for validating intermittent cuffless BP devices (providing measurements every >30 sec and usually 30-60 min, or upon user initiation), which are most common. VALIDATION PROCEDURES: Six validation tests are defined for evaluating different aspects of intermittent cuffless devices: static test (absolute BP accuracy); device position test (hydrostatic pressure effect robustness); treatment test (BP decrease accuracy); awake/asleep test (BP change accuracy); exercise test (BP increase accuracy); and recalibration test (cuff calibration stability over time). Not all these tests are required for a given device. The necessary tests depend on whether the device requires individual user calibration, measures automatically or manually, and takes measurements in more than one position. CONCLUSION: The validation of cuffless BP devices is complex and needs to be tailored according to their functions and calibration. These ESH recommendations present specific, clinically meaningful, and pragmatic validation procedures for different types of intermittent cuffless devices to ensure that only accurate devices will be used in the evaluation and management of hypertension.

Requirements for design and function of blood pressure measuring devices used for the management of hypertension: Consensus Statement by the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and STRIDE BP.

OBJECTIVE: To develop scientific consensus recommendations for the optimal design and functions of different types of blood pressure (BP) measuring devices used in clinical practice for the detection, management, and long-term follow-up of hypertension. METHODS: A scientific consensus meeting was performed by the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and STRIDE BP (Science and Technology for Regional Innovation and Development in Europe) during the 2022 Scientific Meeting of the ESH in Athens, Greece. Manufacturers were also invited to provide their feedback on BP device design and development. Thirty-one international experts in clinical hypertension and BP monitoring contributed to the development of consensus recommendations on the optimal design of BP devices. STATEMENT: International consensus was reached on the requirements for the design and features of five types of BP monitors, including office (or clinic) BP monitors, ambulatory BP monitors, home BP monitors, home BP telemonitors, and kiosk BP monitors for public spaces. For each device type "essential" requirements (must have), and "optional" ones (may have) are presented, as well as additional comments on the optimal device design and features. CONCLUSIONS: These consensus recommendations aim at providing manufacturers of BP devices with the requirements that are considered mandatory, or optional, by clinical experts involved in the detection and management of hypertension. They are also directed to administrative healthcare personnel involved in the provision and purchase of BP devices so that they can recommend the most appropriate ones.

Management of arterial hypertension: home blood pressure measurement is a cornerstone for telemonitoring and self-management.

The development of mobile telephones has made it possible to design blood pressure (BP) monitors with data transmission via cellular lines, contributing to the emergence of "e-health". Today, the direct-to-consumer marketing of devices create a new context allowing an algorithmic processing of information for remote decision-making either by the patient or by a healthcare professional. The home BP telemonitoring (HBPT) is the remote transmission of BP values, measured at home and transmitted to the doctor's office or hospital, by means of telehealth strategies. In this context, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) studies have demonstrated HBPT ability in improving patients' compliance and adherence to treatment and in accomplishing better hypertension control rates. The level of evidence for the drop in BP is "moderate" and the place of HBPT is not clearly established in current practice. Digital interventions have the potential to support patient in self-management. This approach presupposes the prior acquisition of skills, the level of which must be adapted to the level of health literacy of each patient. Few of medical applications (mobile apps or web-apps) for hypertension can be regarded as accurate and safe for clinical use and to date, we do not have high quality evidence to determine the overall effect of the use smartphone apps on BP control.

Blood pressure variability: methodological aspects, clinical relevance and practical indications for management - a European Society of Hypertension position paper ∗.

Blood pressure is not a static parameter, but rather undergoes continuous fluctuations over time, as a result of the interaction between environmental and behavioural factors on one side and intrinsic cardiovascular regulatory mechanisms on the other side. Increased blood pressure variability (BPV) may indicate an impaired cardiovascular regulation and may represent a cardiovascular risk factor itself, having been associated with increased all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, stroke, coronary artery disease, heart failure, end-stage renal disease, and dementia incidence. Nonetheless, BPV was considered only a research issue in previous hypertension management guidelines, because the available evidence on its clinical relevance presents several gaps and is based on heterogeneous studies with limited standardization of methods for BPV assessment. The aim of this position paper, with contributions from members of the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability and from a number of international experts, is to summarize the available evidence in the field of BPV assessment methodology and clinical applications and to provide practical indications on how to measure and interpret BPV in research and clinical settings based on currently available data. Pending issues and clinical and methodological recommendations supported by available evidence are also reported. The information provided by this paper should contribute to a better standardization of future studies on BPV, but should also provide clinicians with some indications on how BPV can be managed based on currently available data.

Cuffless blood pressure measuring devices: review and statement by the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability.

BACKGROUND: Many cuffless blood pressure (BP) measuring devices are currently on the market claiming that they provide accurate BP measurements. These technologies have considerable potential to improve the awareness, treatment, and management of hypertension. However, recent guidelines by the European Society of Hypertension do not recommend cuffless devices for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. OBJECTIVE: This statement by the European Society of Hypertension Working Group on BP Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability presents the types of cuffless BP technologies, issues in their validation, and recommendations for clinical practice. STATEMENTS: Cuffless BP monitors constitute a wide and heterogeneous group of novel technologies and devices with different intended uses. Cuffless BP devices have specific accuracy issues, which render the established validation protocols for cuff BP devices inadequate for their validation. In 2014, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers published a standard for the validation of cuffless BP devices, and the International Organization for Standardization is currently developing another standard. The validation of cuffless devices should address issues related to the need of individual cuff calibration, the stability of measurements post calibration, the ability to track BP changes, and the implementation of machine learning technology. Clinical field investigations may also be considered and issues regarding the clinical implementation of cuffless BP readings should be investigated. CONCLUSION: Cuffless BP devices have considerable potential for changing the diagnosis and management of hypertension. However, fundamental questions regarding their accuracy, performance, and implementation need to be carefully addressed before they can be recommended for clinical use.

Clinical Accuracy of the Withings BPM Connect for Self-Blood Pressure Measurements in Pregnancy and Pre-Eclampsia: Validation According to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard.

Background: Electronic devices for blood pressure (BP) measurements require independent clinical validation as recommended by various authorities/societies, both in general and special populations such as pregnancy. Objective: To assess the accuracy of the Withings BPM Connect device in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia according to the Universal Standard Validation Protocol. Methods: The Withings BPM Connect device measures BP at the brachial level using the oscillometric method. The study was performed according to the so-called "modified AAMI/ESH/ISO (ISO 81060-2:2018) protocol" or the "Universal Standard Protocol". The validation study included 45 pregnant women in the second and third gestational trimester: 15 with pre-eclampsia, 15 with gestational hypertension and 15 normotensives. Differences between mercury sphygmomanometer BP measurements (reference) and device BP values (test) and their standard deviation (SD) were calculated. Results: The mean differences between the mercury standard and device BP values in pregnancy (n = 45) were -0.5 ± 5.7 mmHg for systolic BP (SBP) and -0.8 ± 3.8 mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP). In the preeclamptic patients (n = 15), the mean differences were 0.14 ± 5.5 mmHg for SBP and 0.39 ± 3.7 mmHg for DBP. These results fulfilled the protocol requirements (<5 ± 8 mmHg). Conclusion: The Withings BPM Connect fulfills the validation protocol criteria in pregnancy and pre-eclampsia. Consequently, this device can be recommended for home BP measurements in this specific pregnancy population.

Accuracy of the Withings BPM Connect Device for Self-Blood Pressure Measurements in General Population - Validation According to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard.

Background: As recommended by various authorities and scientific societies, electronic devices for blood pressure (BP) measurements must undergo independent clinical validations for accuracy assessment. Objective: To assess the accuracy of the Withings BPM Connect device in the general population according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization "AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018)". Methods: The Withings BPM Connect device measures BP at the brachial level using the oscillometric method. According to this protocol using the same-arm sequential BP measurement method, subjects (n ≥ 85) fulfilling the age, gender, BP and cuff distribution criteria must be included. Two criteria are used for the analysis: Criterion 1: differences between observers' mercury sphygmomanometer reference measurements and test device BP values (test versus reference) and their standard deviation (SD) must be ≤5 ± 8 mmHg for both systolic (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP). Criterion 2: the SD of the mean BP differences between the test device and reference BP per subject must be ≤6.91/6.62 mmHg for SBP/DBP. Results: Ninety-two subjects were selected, 85 of whom were included. For validation criterion 1, the mean difference ± SD between the reference and device BP values was 0.6 ± 5.3 mmHg for SBP and 2.1 ± 4.3 mmHg for DBP. For criterion 2, the SD of the mean BP differences between the test device and reference BP per subject was 4.2/3.6 mmHg (SBP/DBP). These results fulfilled the AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018) protocol requirements. Conclusion: The Withings BPM Connect oscillometric device for home BP measurement fulfilled all of the accuracy requirements of the AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018) in general population and consequently can be recommended for home BP measurements.

Accuracy of the COMBEI BP118A Device for Self-Blood Pressure Measurements in General Population - Validation According to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization Universal Standard.

Background: Electronic devices for blood pressure (BP) measurements must undergo independent clinical validation as recommended by various authorities and scientific societies. Objective: To assess the accuracy of the Combei BP118A device in the general population according to the Universal Standard Validation Protocol. Methods: The new-developed Combei BP118A device measures BP at the brachial level using the oscillometric method. The study was performed according to the "AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018) protocol". Subjects (n = 88) were recruited to fulfill the age, gender, BP and cuff distribution criteria according to the protocol requirements using the same arm sequential BP measurement method. Differences between observers' mercury sphygmomanometer reference measurements and device BP values (test versus reference) and their standard deviation (SD) were calculated. Results: Ninety-one subjects were selected, 88 of whom were included. The mean BP differences between the simultaneous observers' reference measurements were -0.2 ± 1.7 mmHg for systolic BP (SBP) and -0.2 ± 1.7 mmHg for diastolic BP (DBP). For validation criterion 1, the mean difference ± SD between the reference and device BP values were 3.6 ± 5.5 mmHg for SBP and 1.4 ± 4.5 mmHg for DBP. For criterion 2, the SD of the mean BP differences between the test device and reference BP per subject was 5/4.1 mmHg for SBP/DBP (≤5.9/6.8). These results fulfilled the protocol requirements. Conclusion: The Combei BP118A oscillometric device for home BP measurement fulfilled all of the requirements of the AAMI/ESH/ISO Universal Standard (ISO 81060-2:2018) in general population and consequently can be recommended for home BP measurements.

Home blood pressure monitoring: methodology, clinical relevance and practical application: a 2021 position paper by the Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability of the European Society of Hypertension.

The present paper provides an update of previous recommendations on Home Blood Pressure Monitoring from the European Society of Hypertension (ESH) Working Group on Blood Pressure Monitoring and Cardiovascular Variability sequentially published in years 2000, 2008 and 2010. This update has taken into account new evidence in this field, including a recent statement by the American Heart association, as well as technological developments, which have occurred over the past 20 years. The present document has been developed by the same ESH Working Group with inputs from an international team of experts, and has been endorsed by the ESH.

Validation of the PHILIPS DL8760 upper arm blood pressure monitor, in oscillometry mode, for self-measurement in a general population, according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol revision 2010.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the accuracy of the PHILIPS DL8760, an oscillometric blood pressure (BP) measuring device designed for self-measurement in the general population according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol (ESH-IP) revision 2010. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: The PHILIPS DL8760 measures BP at the brachial level. The validation was performed in 33 subjects. The mean age of the participants was 55.8 ± 14 years. SBP 146.1 ± 26 mmHg (range: 103-193), DBP was 86.8 ± 17.0 mmHg (range: 47-123), and arm circumference was 28.3 ± 4.0 cm (range: 22-39). RESULTS: The PHILIPS DL8760 fulfilled the criteria of the ESH-IP by passing phases one and two for both SBP measurements and DBP measurements. The device overestimated SBP by 1.5 ± 5.0 mmHg and underestimated DBP by 0.7 ± 3.9 mmHg. CONCLUSION: The PHILIPS DL8760 BP device, with its specially designed cuff covering a broad range of arm circumferences, fulfilled the requirements of the International Protocol Revision 2010.

[Lancet Commission on Hypertension Group position statement on the global improvement of accuracy standards for devices that measure blood pressurePosicionamento do Grupo da Lancet Commission on Hypertension sobre a melhoria global dos padrões de acurácia para aparelhos que medem a pressão arterial]. / Declaración de posición del Grupo de la Comisión Lancet de Hipertensión con respecto a la mejora mundial de las normas de exactitud para los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial.

The Lancet Commission on Hypertension identified that a key action to address the worldwide burden of high blood pressure (BP) was to improve the quality of BP measurements by using BP devices that have been validated for accuracy. Currently, there are over 3 000 commercially available BP devices, but many do not have published data on accuracy testing according to established scientific standards. This problem is enabled through weak or absent regulations that allow clearance of devices for commercial use without formal validation. In addition, new BP technologies have emerged (e.g. cuffless sensors) for which there is no scientific consensus regarding BP measurement accuracy standards. Altogether, these issues contribute to the widespread availability of clinic and home BP devices with limited or uncertain accuracy, leading to inappropriate hypertension diagnosis, management and drug treatment on a global scale. The most significant problems relating to the accuracy of BP devices can be resolved by the regulatory requirement for mandatory independent validation of BP devices according to the universally-accepted International Organization for Standardization Standard. This is a primary recommendation for which there is an urgent international need. Other key recommendations are development of validation standards specifically for new BP technologies and online lists of accurate devices that are accessible to consumers and health professionals. Recommendations are aligned with WHO policies on medical devices and universal healthcare. Adherence to recommendations would increase the global availability of accurate BP devices and result in better diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, thus decreasing the worldwide burden from high BP.

A Comissão Lancet sobre Hipertensão Arterial identificou que uma iniciativa central para enfrentar a carga mundial da hipertensão arterial seria a melhoria na qualidade da mensuração da pressão arterial pelo uso aparelhos de pressão arterial validados quanto à acurácia. Atualmente, existem mais de 3 000 aparelhos de pressão arterial disponíveis comercialmente; entretanto, muitos não têm dados publicados sobre testes de acurácia realizados de acordo com padrões científicos estabelecidos. Este problema resulta de regulamentação fraca ou inexistente, o que permite a aprovação para uso comercial de dispositivos sem validação formal. Além disso, surgiram novas tecnologias de mensuração da pressão arterial (por exemplo, sensores sem algemas) sem consenso científico quanto aos padrões de acurácia. No conjunto, essas questões contribuem para a oferta generalizada de dispositivos de pressão arterial clínica e domiciliar com acurácia limitada ou incerta, levando a diagnóstico, gerenciamento e tratamento inadequados da hipertensão em escala global. Os problemas mais significativos relacionados com a acurácia dos dispositivos de pressão arterial podem ser resolvidos por regulamentação que imponha a obrigatoriedade de validação independente dos aparelhos de pressão arterial, de acordo com a norma universalmente aceita pela Organização Internacional de Normalização. Esta é uma recomendação fundamental para a qual existe uma necessidade internacional urgente. Outras recomendações essenciais incluem o desenvolvimento de padrões de validação especificamente para novas tecnologias de mensuração da pressão arterial e listas on-line de aparelhos com acurácia adequada que sejam acessíveis aos consumidores e profissionais de saúde. As recomendações estão alinhadas com as políticas da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) sobre dispositivos médicos e atenção universal à saúde. A adesão às recomendações aumentaria a oferta global de dispositivos de pressão arterial com acurácia adequada e resultaria em melhor diagnóstico e tratamento da hipertensão arterial, diminuindo assim a carga mundial dessa doença.

Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in large arms in research and clinical practice: position paper of the European society of hypertension working group on blood pressure monitoring and cardiovascular variability.

: Blood pressure measurement in obese individuals can be challenging because of the difficulty in properly cuffing large upper arms. Achieving a proper cuff fit can be problematic especially in people with a shorter arm length relative to circumference. This expert statement provides recommendations on blood pressure measurement in large arms for clinical use and research purposes. Tronco-conically shaped cuffs should be used in people with large arms, especially with arm circumferences greater than 42 cm as they better fit on the conical arm shape. Cuffs with frustum of the cone slant angle of 85° should satisfy most conditions. In individuals with short upper-arm that does not allow application of a properly sized cuff, wrist or forearm measurement might be used in clinical practice, but not for validation of automatic devices. Wide-range cuffs coupled to oscillometric devices provided with special software algorithms can also be used as alternatives to standard cuff measurement, provided they are independently validated per AAMI/ISO 81060-2 protocol. For validation studies, the intraarterial measurement is generally considered as the gold standard, yet for possible methodological pitfalls and ethical concerns, it is not recommended as the method of choice. Tronco-conical cuffs with inflatable bladder dimensions of 37-50 × 75-100% arm circumference should be used for reference auscultatory blood pressure measurement wherever the upper arm length allows a proper fit. There is a need for future studies that help identify the optimal shape of cuffs and bladders investigating the influence of sex, age, arm physical properties, and artery characteristics.

Declaración de posición del Grupo de la Comisión Lancet de Hipertensión con respecto a la mejora mundial de las normas de exactitud para los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial

[RESUMEN]. La Comisión Lancet de Hipertensión determinó que una medida clave para responder a la carga mundial que representa la hipertensión arterial era mejorar la calidad de las mediciones de la presión arterial, mediante la utilización de dispositivos cuya exactitud haya sido validada. En la actualidad existen 3000 dispositivos comercializados, pero muchos no tienen datos publicados sobre pruebas de exactitud conformes a las normas científicas establecidas. La falta de regulación o su ineficiencia, que permiten la autorización de dispositivos para uso comercial sin una validación oficial, posibilitan este problema. Además, han surgido tecnologías nuevas de medición de la presión arterial (por ejemplo, los sensores sin brazalete) sobre las cuales no existe unanimidad en la comunidad científica con respecto a las normas de exactitud de la medición. En conjunto, estos aspectos contribuyen a la disponibilidad generalizada de tensiómetros de consultorio o domiciliarios que ofrecen una exactitud limitada o incierta, que llevan a diagnósticos, manejo y farmacoterapia inapropiados de la hipertensión a escala mundial. Los problemas más importantes relacionados con la exactitud de los dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial se pueden resolver mediante el requisito regulatorio de una validación independiente obligatoria de los dispositivos, en consonancia con la norma ISO universalmente aceptada. Esta es una recomendación básica y constituye una necesidad internacional acuciante. Otras recomendaciones clave son la elaboración de normas de validación específicas para las tecnologías nuevas de medición de la presión arterial y la publicación en línea de listas de los dispositivos nuevos exactos que están a la disposición de los usuarios y los profesionales de salud. Las recomendaciones están en consonancia con las políticas de la Organización Mundial de la Salud sobre los dispositivos médicos y la atención universal de la salud. El cumplimiento de las recomendaciones aumentará la disponibilidad mundial de dispositivos de medición de la presión arterial que sean exactos y tendrá como efecto un mejor diagnóstico y tratamiento, reduciendo así la carga mundial de la hipertensión.

[ABSTRACT]. The Lancet Commission on Hypertension identified that a key action to address the worldwide burden of high blood pressure (BP) was to improve the quality of BP measurements by using BP devices that have been validated for accuracy. Currently, there are over 3 000 commercially available BP devices, but many do not have published data on accuracy testing according to established scientific standards. This problem is enabled through weak or absent regulations that allow clearance of devices for commercial use without formal validation. In addition, new BP technologies have emerged (e.g. cuffless sensors) for which there is no scientific consensus regarding BP measurement accuracy standards. Altogether, these issues contribute to the widespread availability of clinic and home BP devices with limited or uncertain accuracy, leading to inappropriate hypertension diagnosis, management and drug treatment on a global scale. The most significant problems relating to the accuracy of BP devices can be resolved by the regulatory requirement for mandatory independent validation of BP devices according to the universally-accepted International Organization for Standardization Standard. This is a primary recommendation for which there is an urgent international need. Other key recommendations are development of validation standards specifically for new BP technologies and online lists of accurate devices that are accessible to consumers and health professionals. Recommendations are aligned with WHO policies on medical devices and universal healthcare. Adherence to recommendations would increase the global availability of accurate BP devices and result in better diagnosis and treatment of hypertension, thus decreasing the worldwide burden from high BP.

[RESUMO]. A Comissão Lancet sobre Hipertensão Arterial identificou que uma iniciativa central para enfrentar a carga mundial da hipertensão arterial seria a melhoria na qualidade da mensuração da pressão arterial pelo uso aparelhos de pressão arterial validados quanto à acurácia. Atualmente, existem mais de 3 000 aparelhos de pressão arterial disponíveis comercialmente; entretanto, muitos não têm dados publicados sobre testes de acurácia realizados de acordo com padrões científicos estabelecidos. Este problema resulta de regulamentação fraca ou inexistente, o que permite a aprovação para uso comercial de dispositivos sem validação formal. Além disso, surgiram novas tecnologias de mensuração da pressão arterial (por exemplo, sensores sem algemas) sem consenso científico quanto aos padrões de acurácia. No conjunto, essas questões contribuem para a oferta generalizada de dispositivos de pressão arterial clínica e domiciliar com acurácia limitada ou incerta, levando a diagnóstico, gerenciamento e tratamento inadequados da hipertensão em escala global. Os problemas mais significativos relacionados com a acurácia dos dispositivos de pressão arterial podem ser resolvidos por regulamentação que imponha a obrigatoriedade de validação independente dos aparelhos de pressão arterial, de acordo com a norma universalmente aceita pela Organização Internacional de Normalização. Esta é uma recomendação fundamental para a qual existe uma necessidade internacional urgente. Outras recomendações essenciais incluem o desenvolvimento de padrões de validação especificamente para novas tecnologias de mensuração da pressão arterial e listas on-line de aparelhos com acurácia adequada que sejam acessíveis aos consumidores e profissionais de saúde. As recomendações estão alinhadas com as políticas da Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS) sobre dispositivos médicos e atenção universal à saúde. A adesão às recomendações aumentaria a oferta global de dispositivos de pressão arterial com acurácia adequada e resultaria em melhor diagnóstico e tratamento da hipertensão arterial, diminuindo assim a carga mundial dessa doença.