Evaluation of the validity of three MABIS blood pressure monitors.

To the Editor: Elevated blood pressure (BP) is positively correlated with age, stroke, coronary heart disease, end-stage renal disease, and heart failure. Hypertension is, usually, diagnosed by the measurement of systolic or diastolic BP. Achievement of normalization of BP is often considered the goal of hypertension management. Therefore, a valid, accurate, and reliable method is essential for the diagnosis and management of hypertension. Although accurate and practical noninvasive BP monitoring has been available since the early 1900s, a number of difficulties are associated with these methods. In a brief review of the literature, Latman et al identified compliance “as a major problem in the treatment of hypertension.” They concluded that patient compliance and outcome can depend on BP monitors that were accurate and easy to use. Historically, the standard for noninvasive BP measurements has been a mercury or aneroid sphygmomanometer combined with a variation of the Riva-Rocci brachial compression cuff. Detection of systolic and diastolic BP has relied on auscultation of the Korotkoff sounds. Although the manual auscultatory methods of the early 1900s could produce accurate systolic and diastolic BP measurements, they had several limitations. They were very user-skill dependent. As self-monitoring of BP became more common, the ease or lack of ease-of-use of the instruments gained in significance. Before the early 1900s, attempts to improve noninvasive BP monitor were mainly concerned with improving accuracy and reliability. Since that time attempts to improve noninvasive monitors have involved improving the ease-of-use as a way of reducing userskill–related errors, reducing the time required to acquire a BP, and increasing compliance. Regardless of the improvements in ease-of-use, the instruments must exhibit an acceptable accuracy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate three new electronic, digital blood pressure monitors for accuracy. These instruments are designed to increase the ease-of-use by reducing the limitations of many previous and currently available instruments. Typically, in noninvasive BP instruments, the compression cuff pressure is increased above the purported systolic pressure, and the BP is measured as the cuff is deflated. Two of the test instruments use this traditional method. One is unique by measuring BP as the compression cuff pressure increases, theoretically reducing the time required to measure BP. This study evaluated the accuracy of three electronic, digital BP monitors currently on the market. The test instruments were the MABIS Semi-Automatic (model 04-263001), MABIS SmartRead (model 04-310-001), and the