فهرست مطالب vida behzadfar

Hypotension and hypertension have the potential ability to injure the vital organs. Controlling blood pressure is necessary to stabilize the patient's hemodynamic situation. There are different blood pressure measurement methods such as invasive blood pressure measurement (IBP), noninvasive blood pressure measurement (NIBP) and auscultatory method. This cross-sectional study was conducted on 20 inpatients of angiography ward of Sina hospital, Isfahan, Iran. The measurement accuracy of IBP, NIBP and auscultatory method compared and the effective parameters in each technique discussed. The mean error and standard deviation of IBP and oscillometric in all patients was -4.06±8.9 for MAP, -3.64±10.3for systolic and -4.22±4.9 for diastolic. The mean error and standard deviation of oscillometric and auscultatory for all patients was -1.73±6.5 in systolic pressure and 0.42±4 in diastolic pressure. Based on gender, systolic pressure error in men was -3.3±4.2 and -0.78±3.6 in women; diastolic pressure error in men was -4.37±9.5 and -4.37±8.9 in women and MAP error reported -4.2±8.57 and -1.2±8.17 in men and women respectively. Findings showed that in the range of normal pressure and prehypertension, the accuracy of IBP, NIBP and auscultatory method was nearly the same but for hypertension grade 1 and 2, only the mean error and standard deviation of MAP is acceptable. Considering the effect of gender on blood pressure manifest that the error of systolic pressure, diastolic pressure and MAP for women is less than men.