12 BLOOD PRESSURE MEASUREMENT USING A CUFFLESS SMARTWATCH / SMARTPHONE VERSUS CONVENTIONAL CUFFED-BASED: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to compare blood pressure (BP) measurement results between cuffless and conventional cuffed-based devices. Methods: Systematic literature searches of PubMed, Science Direct, Proquest, and Springer Link databases were performed on June 2021. Studies comparing data of in- office BP measurement, including systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP), in healthy adult subjects using cuffless and conventional cuffed- based devices are included. BP measurement should be conducted twice and alternately using both devices at one time. Studies that reported only one outcome parameter were also included. Two reviewers evaluate the quality of included studies using The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. A random-effects meta-analysis of mean difference (MD) was conducted. A publication bias test was conducted using a funnel plot for outcomes that have ten studies included. Results: We identified eleven studies comprising of 2344 healthy adult subjects which three studies only reported SBP data. The included studies tend to have reporting and attrition bias. The meta-analysis results showed that cuffless device measured lower than conventional cuffed-based device for SBP by 2.64 mmHg (MD -2.64, 95%CI - 4.83 to -0.46, p=0.02; I2 74.5%). However, DBP results have no difference for both devices (MD -0.43, 95%CI -3.88 to 3.02, p=0.81; I2 91.1%). The funnel plot demonstrated slightly asymmetrical distribution of studies that indicating lower measurements for SBP most likely found in study with large samples. Conclusion: The cuffless device measured lower SBP compared than the conventional cuffed-based device whereas there is no difference in DBP. Nevertheless, the heterogeneity between studies was high.