9 CONGRUENCY OF ANEROID AND DIGITAL SPHYGMOMANOMETER

Abstract

Background: Measurement of blood pressure might be measured with several modalities: mercury, digital, and aneroid sphygmomanometer. Aim: To determine the variability and reliability of aneroid sphygmomanometer compared to digital sphygmomanometer. Method: This is a cross-sectional study. A number of 168 series measurements were done using each aneroid and digital sphygmomanometer. Every series of measurements consist of two measurements each of both digital and aneroid sphygmomanometer. Result: We found no significant differences between the first and the second measurement between the first and second measurement in digital (systolic: Z −1.484, p: 0.138; diastolic: Z −0.164; p 0.870) and aneroid (systolic: Z −0.109, p 0.913; diastolic: Z −1.267, p 0.205) sphygmomanometer. Although there is significant difference between the result of blood pressure measurement using digital and aneroid blood pressure (Mean systolic aneroid- Mean systolic digital: Z −4.021, p < 0.0001; Mean diastolic aneroid - mean diastolic digital: Z −2.018, p < 0.0044), the clinical significance of the difference between the result was determined from the previous study to be 5 mmHg. Proving its low variability of the result between aneroid and digital sphygmomanometer. Conclusion: Both modalities showed reliable measurement in terms of variability. However, the precision between the two modalities are still questionable. Examination using three modalities (aneroid, digital, and mercury sphygmomanometer) should be considered for further improvement in the future studies.