https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Index ${session.getAttribute("locale")} 5 https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:15358 Wed 11 Apr 2018 13:14:27 AEST ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:29916 Thu 27 Jan 2022 15:56:37 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:30003 Thu 13 Jan 2022 10:28:39 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:11295 0.1). Approximately 71% of SBP readings with the DESK position were within ±10 mmHg, whereas it was 62.5% and 34% for HORIZONTAL and SHOULDER positions, respectively. Wrist DBP attained category D with BHS criteria with all three arm positions. Bland–Altman plots illustrated that the wrist monitor systematically underestimated SBP and DBP values. However a reading adjustment of 5 and 10 mmHg for SBP and DBP (DESK position) resulted in improvement with 75% and 77% of the readings being within 10 mmHg (grade B), respectively. AAMI criteria were not fulfilled due to heterogeneity. The findings also showed that the mismatch between the mercury and wrist-cuff systolic BP readings was directly associated with pulse pressure. In conclusion the DESK position produces the most accurate readings when compared to the mercury device. Although wrist BP measurement may underestimate BP measured compared to a mercury device, an adjustment by 5 and 10 mmHg for SBP and DBP, respectively, creates a valid result with the DESK position. Nevertheless, considering the observed variations and the possible impact of arterial stiffness, individual clinical validation is recommended.]]> Sat 24 Mar 2018 08:11:59 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:11482 Sat 24 Mar 2018 08:10:24 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:21175 Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:58:05 AEDT ]]> https://ogma.newcastle.edu.au/vital/access/ /manager/Repository/uon:5110 Sat 24 Mar 2018 07:48:52 AEDT ]]>