This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Peter B. Bottini, PharmD; Albert A. Carr, MD
Augusta, Ga

Arch Intern Med. 1994;154(13):1536.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In their recent article concerning indirect measurement of blood pressures, Bailey and Bauer¹ emphasize the importance of collection technique on the variability of indirect blood pressure measurements. In their conservative discussion of 24-hour automated blood pressure (ABP) monitoring (ABPM), the authors express a lack of confidence in the accuracy and reproducibility of ABPM, in part because of our experience with repeatability of ABPM during one of our research projects.² However, to fully appreciate the reproducibility of ABPM, the variability of office blood pressures (OBPs) using a standard mercury sphygmomanometer should be presented in comparison. We presented a direct comparison of the variability of office and 24-hour ABPs in a subsequent article,³ which, although not referenced by the authors, contributes new information on the variability of indirect blood pressures and, thus, deserves comment.

For the purposes of this discussion, reliability of blood pressures for an individual can be . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?