{"id":8268,"date":"2025-04-13T01:00:00","date_gmt":"2025-04-13T01:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/bostonsp.com\/?p=8268"},"modified":"2026-07-27T14:35:00","modified_gmt":"2026-07-27T14:35:00","slug":"systolic-pressure-and-pulse-rate-range-performance-comparison-of-seven-non-invasive-blood-pressure-monitors","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/bostonsp.com\/index.php\/2025\/04\/13\/systolic-pressure-and-pulse-rate-range-performance-comparison-of-seven-non-invasive-blood-pressure-monitors\/","title":{"rendered":"Systolic Pressure and Pulse Rate Range Performance Comparison of Seven Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Monitors"},"content":{"rendered":"

Beard, J., Pichard, K., Attebery, J. E., Yapici, H. O., & Coffeng, R. (2025). Systolic Pressure and Pulse Rate Range Performance Comparison of Seven Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Monitors. Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 18, 241\u2013246. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2147\/MDER.S520615<\/a><\/p>\n

View article<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n\n\n

<\/div>\n\n\n

Abstract<\/h4>\n
\n

Purpose
To evaluate blood pressure (BP) and pulse rate (PR) measurement range and determination time of selected non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) monitors.<\/p>\n

Patients and Methods
Seven oscillometric NIBP monitors underwent laboratory-based simulations of high and low BP and PR values to determine the outer bounds that each monitor could measure. Reliability was determined by devices\u2019 ability to detect simulation signals of chosen BP\/PR values. Determination times were analyzed using One-Way ANOVA followed by post-hoc Tukey honestly significant difference.<\/p>\n

Results
All monitors reliably reported 50\u2013 180 mmHg and 80\u2013 140 bpm simulations, except Connex which provided the narrowest ranges (only reliable at 140 and 230 bpm; 50\u2013 180 mmHg). B125 and Efficia CM120 had the widest ranges for PR (30\u2013 240 bpm and 30\u2013 220 bpm, respectively) and systolic BP (30\u2013 250 mmHg for both). Connex presented the quickest mean determination time (19.23s), followed by B125 (24.14s).<\/p>\n

Conclusion
NIBP monitor performances varied considerably outside mid-range BP\/PR and there were significant differences across determination times. NIBP devices that strike a balance between range and speed may provide the greatest clinical utility.<\/p>\n<\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Beard, J., Pichard, K., Attebery, J. E., Yapici, H. O., & Coffeng, R. (2025). Systolic Pressure and Pulse Rate Range Performance Comparison of Seven Non-Invasive Blood Pressure Monitors. Medical devices (Auckland, N.Z.), 18, 241\u2013246. https:\/\/doi.org\/10.2147\/MDER.S520615<\/a> View article Abstract PurposeTo evaluate blood pressure (BP) and pulse rate (PR) measurement range and determination time of selected non-invasive […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":8266,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"_eb_attr":"","om_disable_all_campaigns":false,"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_uf_show_specific_survey":0,"_uf_disable_surveys":false,"_wpcom_ai_launchpad_first_post":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false},"categories":[9],"tags":[442,443,441,444,446],"class_list":["post-8268","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-publications","tag-blood-pressure","tag-heart-rate","tag-reliability","tag-simulations","tag-systolic-pressure"],"acf":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t