Ignite Creation Date:
2025-12-24 @ 1:29 PM
Ignite Modification Date:
2026-02-24 @ 12:13 AM
Study NCT ID:
NCT01753895
Status:
COMPLETED
Last Update Posted:
2014-05-06
First Post:
2012-12-05
Is NOT Gene Therapy:
True
Has Adverse Events:
False
Brief Title:
Mercury Versus Automated Blood Pressure Monitoring
Sponsor:
Rockefeller University
Organization:
Study Overview
Official Title:
Comparison of Manual Blood Pressure Monitoring Using a Mercury Sphygmomanometer to an Automated Blood Pressure Instrument in a Research Setting
Status:
COMPLETED
Status Verified Date:
2014-05
Last Known Status:
None
Delayed Posting:
No
If Stopped, Why?:
Not Stopped
Has Expanded Access:
False
If Expanded Access, NCT#:
N/A
Has Expanded Access, NCT# Status:
N/A
Acronym:
None
Brief Summary:
Blood pressure (BP) measurement is one of the most commonly performed screening tests in the clinical setting. Its accuracy is vital to the early diagnosis and effective management of hypertension, as emphasized by hypertension management guidelines. For most protocols being conducted in a clinical research setting, obtaining single or serial blood pressure reading(s) is often performed as a safety assessment, especially if the individual is participating in a study that requires a blood draw and/or the administration of a research drug, vaccine or device. It is imperative that the blood pressure data truly reflect the response, if any, the study participant experiences in relation to the research procedures and interventions.
Detailed Description:
Despite the clear guidelines on manual blood pressure technique, there seems to be large inter-observer variations, both among nursing staff and physicians. These differences are further complicated by variables such as cuff selection and application, incorrect cuff positioning and rapid cuff deflation rate, inadequate rest period, and lack of repeated measurements. The blood pressure measurement obtained by an automated device is not as dependent on observer training and competency as the manual mercury device, yet its use requires careful patient evaluation for caffeine or nicotine use, cuff position, and proper wrist positioning, and instructing the individual not to move or talk if accurate blood pressures are to be obtained. If one performs the automated readings and manual blood pressure measurements under standardized conditions, the mean values will be quite similar; however, this possibility has not yet been fully tested.
Therefore, there is a need to assess systematically if there is in fact a difference in the two blood pressure monitoring approaches under controlled conditions. The goal of this study, then, is to examine our current practice of obtaining manual blood pressure measurement using a mercury sphygmomanometer compared to an automated wrist-mounted blood pressure device.
A possible implication of this study is if the blood pressure measurements using the automated blood pressure device are comparable to the measurements obtained using the mercury sphygmomanometer, than the mercury devices can be replaced by the more environmentally acceptable automated devices in our clinical research setting.
Therefore, there is a need to assess systematically if there is in fact a difference in the two blood pressure monitoring approaches under controlled conditions. The goal of this study, then, is to examine our current practice of obtaining manual blood pressure measurement using a mercury sphygmomanometer compared to an automated wrist-mounted blood pressure device.
A possible implication of this study is if the blood pressure measurements using the automated blood pressure device are comparable to the measurements obtained using the mercury sphygmomanometer, than the mercury devices can be replaced by the more environmentally acceptable automated devices in our clinical research setting.
Study Oversight
Has Oversight DMC:
False
Is a FDA Regulated Drug?:
None
Is a FDA Regulated Device?:
None
Is an Unapproved Device?:
None
Is a PPSD?:
None
Is a US Export?:
None
Is an FDA AA801 Violation?: