Accuracy of Aneroid Versus Digital Sphygmomanometer in Community-Based Screening for Hypertension in Hubballi, Karnataka, India - A Cross-Sectional Study

Mahesh D Kurugodiyavar; Roopakala N; Kashavva B Andanigoudar

doi:10.55489/njcm.151220244689

Authors

Mahesh D Kurugodiyavar Karnataka Medical College and Research Institute, Hubli, Karnataka, India
Roopakala N Navodaya Medical College, Raichur, Karnataka, India
Kashavva B Andanigoudar JGMM Medical College, Hubli. Karnataka, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.55489/njcm.151220244689

Keywords:

Aneroid sphygmomanometer, Bland-Altman plot, Blood pressure, Digital sphygmomanometer

Abstract

Background: Hypertension is a significant global health issue, responsible for approximately 7.5 million deaths annually. Even a modest increase of 5 mm Hg in systolic blood pressure (BP) can elevate the risk of fatal stroke and infarction by about 25%. Hence this study aimed to assess the accuracy of aneroid and digital sphygmomanometers relative to the mercury sphygmomanometer.

Methodology: This community-based cross-sectional study was conducted in the urban slums of old Hubballi among 270 participants aged 30 years and above. Participants were selected using Probability Proportion to Size from 3 wards. Blood pressures were measured with all three sphygmomanometers and Bland Altman plot analysis was done.

Results: The results revealed that the mean difference in systolic blood pressure compared to mercury was -0.57 mmHg for the aneroid and -4.63 mmHg for the digital (p <0.05). For diastolic blood pressure, the mean difference was -0.39 mmHg for the aneroid and -3.43 mmHg for the digital (p <0.05). Bland-Altman analysis showed agreement limits of 66.3% for systolic and 75.2% for diastolic blood pressure with the aneroid sphygmomanometer.

Conclusion: The aneroid sphygmomanometer provides more reliable BP readings compared to the digital sphygmomanometer for both systolic and diastolic measurements.

References

World Health Organization. (‎2011)‎. Global status report on noncommunicable diseases 2010. World Health Organization. Available from https://iris.who.int/handle/10665/44579

Gupta R, Xavier D. Hypertension: The most important non communicable disease risk factor in India. Indian Heart J. 2018 Jul-Aug;70(4):565-572. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ihj.2018.02.003 PMid:30170654 PMCid:PMC6116711

Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R. Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet. 2002;360(9349):1903-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)11911-8 PMid:12493255

Jones DW, Appel LJ, Sheps SG, Roccella EJ, Lenfant C. Measuring blood pressure accurately: new and persistent challenges. JAMA. 2003;289(8):1027-30. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.289.8.1027 PMid:12597757

Muntner P, Shimbo D, Carey RM, Charleston JB, Gaillard T, Misra S, et al. Measurement of blood pressure in humans: A scientific statement from the American Heart Association. Hypertension.2019;73(5):e35-e66. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/HYP.0000000000000087 PMCid:PMC11409525

Directive 2007/51/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 September 2007 amending Council Directive 76/769/EEC relating to restrictions on the marketing of certain measuring devices containing mercury (Text with EEA relevance) [Internet]. 2007. Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX:32007L0051.

United Nations Environmental Programme. Global Mercury Assessment. UNEP Chemicals, Geneva; December 2002. Available from: https://www.unep.org/resources/report/global-mercury-assessment-2002-0

A'Court C, Stevens R, Sanders S, Ward A, McManus R, Heneghan C. Type and accuracy of sphygmomanometers in primary care: a cross-sectional observational study. Br J Gen Pract. 2011;61(590)-603. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3399/bjgp11X593884 PMid:22152749 PMCid:PMC3162183

National Heart, Blood and Lung Institute. The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure. US Department of Health and Human Services; August 2004. Available from: http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/hypertension/jnc7full.pdf.

O'Brien E, Waeber B, Parati G, Staessen J, Myers MG. Blood pressure measuring devices: recommendations of the European Society of Hypertension. BMJ. 2001;322:531-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.322.7285.531 PMid:11230071 PMCid:PMC1119736

Buchanan S, Orris P, Karliner J. Alternatives to the mercury sphygmomanometer. J Public Health Policy. 2011;32(1):107-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jphp.2010.38 PMid:21109765

Shahbabu B, Dasgupta A, Sarkar K, Sahoo SK. Which is more accurate in measuring the blood pressure? A digital or an aneroid sphygmomanometer. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016;10(3). DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2016/14351.7458 PMid:27134902 PMCid:PMC4843288

How to measure Blood Pressure. Available from How to measure Blood Pressure - British and Irish Hypertension Society | Registered UK Charity No. 287635 (bihsoc.org)

Martin J. Hypertension guidelines: revisiting the JNC 7 recommendations. J Lanc Gen Hosp. 2008;3(3):91-7. Available from: http://www.jlgh.org/JLGH/media/Journal-LGH-Media-Library/Past%20Issues/Volume%203%20-%20Issue%203/JLGH_V3n3_p91-97.pdf.

Canzanello VJ, Jensen PL, Schwartz GL. Are aneroid sphygmomanometers accurate in hospital and clinic settings? Arch Intern Med. 2001;161(5):729-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/archinte.161.5.685 PMid:11231700

Ostchega Y, Prineas RJ, Nwankwo T, Zipf G. Assessing blood pressure accuracy of an aneroid sphygmomanometer in a national survey environment. Am J Hypertens. 2011 Mar;24(3):322-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ajh.2010.232. Epub 2010 Dec 16. PMID: 21164495.

Kakkad KM, Damor P, Parmar B, Patel S, Prajapati V, Dhivar N. Comparative Study of Blood Pressure Measurement by Aneroid and Digital Manual Sphygmomanometer. Natl J Community Med [Internet]. 2016 Aug. 31;7(08):700-2. Available from: https://www.njcmindia.com/index.php/file/article/view/1034

Heemanshu Shekhar Gogoi. A Comparative Study on Blood Pressure Measurement by Automated versus Manual Mercury Sphygmomanometer in the Urban Population of Deoghar, Jharkhand. Indian Journal of Basic and Applied Medical Research; September 2020: Vol.-9, Issue- 4, P. 229-240 DOI: 10.36848/IJBAMR/2020/18215.56055

Hamied, Lola Ilona Abdul; Sofiatin, Yulia; Rakhmilla, Lulu Eva; Putripratama, Ayu Anisa; Roesli, Rully M.A.. Comparison of Mercury, Aneroid and Digital Sphygmomanometer in Community Setting. Journal of Hypertension 33:p e33-e34, June 2015. | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0000469843.06908.c3

Shah AS, Dolan LM, D'Agostino RB Jr, Standiford D, Davis C, Testaverde L, Pihoker C, Daniels SR, Urbina EM; SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study Group. Comparison of mercury and aneroid blood pressure measurements in youth. Pediatrics. 2012 May;129(5):e1205-10. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2011-3087 PMid:22508914 PMCid:PMC3340597

Putripratama, Ayu Anisa; Rahayuningsih, Sri Endah; Hamied, Lola Ilona Fuad Abdul; Sofiatin, Yulia; Roesli, Rully M.A.. Mean Differences between Digital and Mercury Sphygmomanometer in Community-Based Setting. Journal of Hypertension 33():p e34, June 2015. | DOI: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/01.hjh.0000469844.01070.05

Bhatt Pooja & Arora, Smriti & Tamang, EKL. (2016). Comparison of Measurement Accuracy of Aneroid, Digital, and Mercury Sphygmomanometer. Journal of nursing science and practice. 6. 28-32.

Yong Ma, Marinella Temprosa, Sarah Fowler, Ronald J. Prineas, Maria G. Montez, Janet Brown-Friday, Mary L. Carrion-Petersen, Tracy Whittington, for The Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group, Evaluating the Accuracy of an Aneroid Sphygmomanometer in a Clinical Trial Setting, American Journal of Hypertension, Volume 22, Issue 3, March 2009, Pages 263-266, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/ajh.2008.338 PMid:19057514 PMCid:PMC2699679

Kumar, Madhan Srinivasan & Kumar, K. & Ilango, Saraswathi & Raaju, A. & Rao, B.. (2018). Are Automated Blood Pressure Apparatus Reliable? Automated Versus Manual Measurement of Blood Pressure. Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. 12. CC09-CC12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7860/JCDR/2018/34993.11868

Muniyandi, M., Sellappan, S., Chellaswamy, V. et al. Diagnostic accuracy of mercurial versus digital blood pressure measurement devices: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sci Rep 12, 3363 (2022). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-07315-z PMid:35233077 PMCid:PMC8888622