Evaluation of a new smartphone optical blood pressure application (OptiBP™) in the post-anesthesia care unit: a method comparison study against the non-invasive automatic oscillometric brachial cuff as the reference method.
Arterial hypertension
Hemodynamic
Hemodynamic monitoring
Mobile health
Mobile phone
Postoperative
Journal
Journal of clinical monitoring and computing
ISSN: 1573-2614
Titre abrégé: J Clin Monit Comput
Pays: Netherlands
ID NLM: 9806357
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
10 2022
10 2022
Historique:
received:
22
10
2021
accepted:
20
12
2021
pubmed:
4
1
2022
medline:
28
9
2022
entrez:
3
1
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We compared blood pressure (BP) values obtained with a new optical smartphone application (OptiBP™) with BP values obtained using a non-invasive automatic oscillometric brachial cuff (reference method) during the first 2 h of surveillance in a post-anesthesia care unit in patients after non-cardiac surgery. Three simultaneous BP measurements of both methods were recorded every 30 min over a 2-h period. The agreement between measurements was investigated using Bland-Altman and error grid analyses. We also evaluated the performance of the OptiBP™ using ISO81060-2:2018 standards which requires the mean of the differences ± standard deviation (SD) between both methods to be less than 5 mmHg ± 8 mmHg. Of 120 patients enrolled, 101 patients were included in the statistical analysis. The Bland-Altman analysis demonstrated a mean of the differences ± SD between the test and reference methods of + 1 mmHg ± 7 mmHg for mean arterial pressure (MAP), + 2 mmHg ± 11 mmHg for systolic arterial pressure (SAP), and + 1 mmHg ± 8 mmHg for diastolic arterial pressure (DAP). Error grid analysis showed that the proportions of measurement pairs in risk zones A to E were 90.3% (no risk), 9.7% (low risk), 0% (moderate risk), 0% (significant risk), 0% (dangerous risk) for MAP and 89.9%, 9.1%, 1%, 0%, 0% for SAP. We observed a good agreement between BP values obtained by the OptiBP™ system and BP values obtained with the reference method. The OptiBP™ system fulfilled the AAMI validation requirements for MAP and DAP and error grid analysis indicated that the vast majority of measurement pairs (≥ 99%) were in risk zones A and B.Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04262323.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34978654
doi: 10.1007/s10877-021-00795-w
pii: 10.1007/s10877-021-00795-w
doi:
Banques de données
ClinicalTrials.gov
['NCT04262323']
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1525-1533Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s), under exclusive licence to Springer Nature B.V.
Références
Mills KT, Stefanescu A, He J. The global epidemiology of hypertension. Nat Rev Nephrol. 2020;16:223–37.
doi: 10.1038/s41581-019-0244-2
Floras JS, Jones JV, Hassan MO, Osikowska B, Sever PS, Sleight P. Cuff and ambulatory blood pressure in subjects with essential hypertension. Lancet. 1981;2:107–9.
doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(81)90296-8
Patel AA. Developing and evaluating mHealth solutions for chronic disease prevention in primary care. Circulation. 2019;139:392–4.
doi: 10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.118.038389
Michard F. Smartphones and e-tablets in perioperative medicine. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2017;70:493–9.
doi: 10.4097/kjae.2017.70.5.493
Michard F, Barrachina B, Schoettker P. Is your smartphone the future of physiologic monitoring? Intensive Care Med. 2019;45:869–71.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-018-5419-y
Michard F. Toward smart monitoring with phones, watches, and wearable sensors. Anesthesiol Clin. 2021;39:555–64.
doi: 10.1016/j.anclin.2021.04.005
Hoppe P, Gleibs F, Briesenick L, Joosten A, Saugel B. Estimation of pulse pressure variation and cardiac output in patients having major abdominal surgery: a comparison between a mobile application for snapshot pulse wave analysis and invasive pulse wave analysis. J Clin Monit Comput 2021;35(5):1203–9
Joosten A, Boudart C, Vincent JL, et al. Ability of a new smartphone pulse pressure variation and cardiac output application to predict fluid responsiveness in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Anesth Analg. 2019;128:1145–51.
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000003652
Desebbe O, Vincent JL, Saugel B, Rinehart J, Joosten A. Pulse pressure variation using a novel smartphone application (Capstesia) versus invasive pulse contour analysis in patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a secondary analysis focusing on clinical decision making. J Clin Monit Comput. 2020;34:379–80.
doi: 10.1007/s10877-019-00300-4
Joosten A, Jacobs A, Desebbe O, et al. Monitoring of pulse pressure variation using a new smartphone application (Capstesia) versus stroke volume variation using an uncalibrated pulse wave analysis monitor: a clinical decision making study during major abdominal surgery. J Clin Monit Comput. 2019;33:787–93.
doi: 10.1007/s10877-018-00241-4
Desebbe O, Joosten A, Suehiro K, et al. A novel mobile phone application for pulse pressure variation monitoring based on feature extraction technology: a method comparison study in a simulated environment. Anesth Analg. 2016;123:105–13.
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000001282
Ghamri Y, Proença M, Hofmann G, et al. Automated pulse oximeter waveform analysis to track changes in blood pressure during anesthesia induction: a proof-of-concept study. Anesth Analg. 2020;130:1222–33.
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004678
Jorge J, Proenca M, Aguet C, et al. Machine learning approaches for improved continuous, non-occlusive arterial pressure monitoring using photoplethysmography. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2020;2020:910–3.
pubmed: 33018132
Schoettker P, Degott J, Hofmann G, et al. Blood pressure measurements with the OptiBP smartphone app validated against reference auscultatory measurements. Sci Rep. 2020;10:17827.
doi: 10.1038/s41598-020-74955-4
Degott J, Ghajarzadeh-Wurzner A, Hofmann G, et al. Smartphone based blood pressure measurement: accuracy of the OptiBP mobile application according to the AAMI/ESH/ISO universal validation protocol. Blood Press Monit 2021
Desebbe O, Tighenifi A, Jacobs A, et al. Evaluation of a novel mobile phone application for blood pressure monitoring: a proof of concept study. J Clin Monit Comput 2021
Ramsey M 3rd. Blood pressure monitoring: automated oscillometric devices. J Clin Monit. 1991;7:56–67.
doi: 10.1007/BF01617900
Bland JM, Altman DG. Agreement between methods of measurement with multiple observations per individual. J Biopharm Stat. 2007;17:571–82.
doi: 10.1080/10543400701329422
Stergiou GS, Palatini P, Asmar R, et al. Recommendations and Practical Guidance for performing and reporting validation studies according to the Universal Standard for the validation of blood pressure measuring devices by the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation/European Society of Hypertension/International Organization for Standardization (AAMI/ESH/ISO). J Hypertens. 2019;37:459–66.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000002039
Grothe O, Kaplan A, Kouz K, Saugel B. Computer program for error grid analysis in arterial blood pressure method comparison studies. Anesth Analg. 2020;130:e71–4.
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000004584
Saugel B, Grothe O, Nicklas JY. Error grid analysis for arterial pressure method comparison studies. Anesth Analg. 2018;126:1177–85.
doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002585
Kottner J, Audigé L, Brorson S, et al. Guidelines for Reporting Reliability and Agreement Studies (GRRAS) were proposed. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:96–106.
doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2010.03.002
Cecconi M, Dawson D, Grounds RM, Rhodes A. Lithium dilution cardiac output measurement in the critically ill patient: determination of precision of the technique. Intensive Care Med. 2009;35:498–504.
doi: 10.1007/s00134-008-1292-4
Williams B, Mancia G, Spiering W, et al. 2018 ESC/ESH Guidelines for the management of arterial hypertension: The Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension: the Task Force for the management of arterial hypertension of the European Society of Cardiology and the European Society of Hypertension. J Hypertens. 2018;36:1953–2041.
doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000001940