• 1.

    Brown S, Atkins R, Bagley A, et al. Guidelines for the identification, evaluation and management of systemic hypertension in dogs and cats. J Vet Intern Med 2007; 21:542558.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Sawyer DC, Guikema AH, Siegel EM. Evaluation of a new oscillometric blood pressure monitor in isoflurane-anesthetized dogs. Vet Anaesth Analg 2004; 31:2739.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Habermann CE, Kang CW, Morgan JD, et al. Evaluation of oscillometric and Doppler ultrasonic methods of indirect blood pressure estimation in conscious dogs. Can J Vet Res 2006; 70:211217.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Bodey AR, Michell AR, Bovee KC, et al. Comparison of direct and indirect (oscillometric) measurements of arterial blood pressure in conscious dogs. Res Vet Sci 1996; 61:1721.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Bodey AR, Young LE, Bartram DH. A comparison of direct and indirect (oscillometric) measurements of arterial blood pressure in anaesthetised dogs using tail and limb cuffs. Res Vet Sci 1994; 57:265269.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Gains MJ, Grodecki KM, Jacobs RM, et al. Comparison of direct and indirect blood pressure measurements in anesthetized dogs. Can J Vet Res 1995; 59:238240.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Sawyer DC, Brown M, Striler EL. Comparison of direct and indirect blood pressure measurement in anesthetized dogs. Lab Anim Sci 1991; 41:134138.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Stepien RL, Rapoport GS. Clinical comparison of three methods to measure blood pressure in nonsedated dogs. J Am Vet Med Assoc 1999; 215:16231628.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Chalifoux A, Dallaire A, Blais D, et al. Evaluation of the arterial blood pressure of dogs by two noninvasive methods. Can J Comp Med 1985; 49:419423.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Deflandre CJ, Hellebrekers LJ. Clinical evaluation of the Surgivet V60046, a non invasive blood pressure monitor in anaesthetized dogs. Vet Anaesth Analg 2008; 35:1321.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Meurs KM, Miller MW, Slater MR. Comparison of the indirect oscillometric and direct arterial methods for blood pressure measurements in anesthetized dogs. J Am Anim Hosp Assoc 1996; 32:471475.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Grosenbaugh DA, Muir WW III. Accuracy of noninvasive oxyhemoglobin saturation, end-tidal carbon dioxide concentration, and blood pressure monitoring during experimentally induced hypoxemia, hypotension, or hypertension in anesthetized dogs. Am J Vet Res 1998; 59:205212.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Hamlin RL, Kittleson MD, Rice D, et al. Noninvasive measurement of systemic arterial pressure in dogs by automatic sphygmomanometry. Am J Vet Res 1982; 43:12711273.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Wernick M, Doherr M, Howard J, et al. Evaluation of high-definition and conventional oscilometric blood pressure measurement in anaesthetised dogs using ACVIM guidelines. J Small Anim Pract 2010; 91:318324.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Bodey AR, Michell AR. Longitudinal studies of reproducibility and variability of indirect (oscillometric) blood pressure measurement in dogs: evidence from tracking. Res Vet Sci 1997; 63:1521.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 16.

    Hsiang T-Y, Lien Y-H, Huang H-P. Indirect measurement of systemic blood pressure in conscious dogs in a clinical setting. J Vet Med Sci 2008; 70:449453.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Chetboul V, Tissier R, Gouni V, et al. Comparison of Doppler ultrasonography and high-definition oscillometry for blood pressure measurements in healthy awake dogs. Am J Vet Res 2010; 71:766772.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    Geddes LA, Combs W, Denton W, et al. Indirect mean arterial pressure in the anesthetized dog. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol 1980; 238:H664H666.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Stepien RL, Rapoport GS, Henik RA, et al. Comparative diagnostic test characteristics of oscillometric and Doppler ultrasonographic methods in the detection of systolic hypertension in dogs. J Vet Intern Med 2003; 17:6572.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    McMurphy RM, Stoll MR, McCubrey R. Accuracy of an ocsillometric blood pressure monitor during phenylephrine-induced hypertension in dogs. Am J Vet Res 2006; 67:15411545.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Mishina M, Watanabe T, Fujii K, et al. A clinical evaluation of blood pressure through non-invasive measurement using the oscillometric procedure in conscious dogs. J Vet Med Sci 1997; 59:989993.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI). ANSI/AAMI/ISO 81060–1: 2007: non-invasive sphygmomanometers—part 1: requirements and test methods for non-automated measurement type. Arlington, Va: Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, 2008.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 23.

    White S, van den Broek NR. Methods for assessing reliability and validity for a measurement tool: a case study and critique using the WHO haemoglobin colour scale. Statist Med 2004; 23:16031619.

    • Crossref
    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 24.

    Altman DG. Inter-rater agreement. In: Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall, 1991;403409.

Advertisement

Comparison of arterial blood pressure measurements and hypertension scores obtained by use of three indirect measurement devices in hospitalized dogs

Morena B. WernickSmall Animal Clinic, Department of Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, 3001 Bern, Switzerland.

Search for other papers by Morena B. Wernick in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Robert M. HöpfnerSmall Animal Clinic, Department of Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, 3001 Bern, Switzerland.

Search for other papers by Robert M. Höpfner in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM
,
Thierry FranceySmall Animal Clinic, Department of Small Animal Internal Medicine, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, 3001 Bern, Switzerland.

Search for other papers by Thierry Francey in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, DACVIM
, and
Judith HowardClinical Laboratory, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Bern, 3001 Bern, Switzerland

Search for other papers by Judith Howard in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
 DVM, DACVIM

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the agreement of blood pressure measurements and hypertension scores obtained by use of 3 indirect arterial blood pressure measurement devices in hospitalized dogs.

Design—Diagnostic test evaluation.

Animals—29 client-owned dogs.

Procedures—5 to 7 consecutive blood pressure readings were obtained from each dog on each of 3 occasions with a Doppler ultrasonic flow detector, a standard oscillometric device (STO), and a high-definition oscillometric device (HDO).

Results—When the individual sets of 5 to 7 readings were evaluated, the coefficient of variation for systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) exceeded 20% for 0% (Doppler), 11 % (STO), and 28% (HDO) of the sets of readings. After readings that exceeded a 20% coefficient of variation were discarded, repeatability was within 25 (Doppler), 37 (STO), and 39 (HDO) mm Hg for SAP. Correlation of mean values among the devices was between 0.47 and 0.63. Compared with Doppler readings, STO underestimated and HDO overestimated SAP. Limits of agreement between mean readings of any 2 devices were wide. With the hypertension scale used to score SAP, the intraclass correlation of scores was 0.48. Linear-weighted inter-rater reliability between scores was 0.40 (Doppler vs STO), 0.38 (Doppler vs HDO), and 0.29 (STO vs HDO).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results of this study suggested that no meaningful clinical comparison can be made between blood pressure readings obtained from the same dog with different indirect blood pressure measurement devices.

Abstract

Objective—To evaluate the agreement of blood pressure measurements and hypertension scores obtained by use of 3 indirect arterial blood pressure measurement devices in hospitalized dogs.

Design—Diagnostic test evaluation.

Animals—29 client-owned dogs.

Procedures—5 to 7 consecutive blood pressure readings were obtained from each dog on each of 3 occasions with a Doppler ultrasonic flow detector, a standard oscillometric device (STO), and a high-definition oscillometric device (HDO).

Results—When the individual sets of 5 to 7 readings were evaluated, the coefficient of variation for systolic arterial blood pressure (SAP) exceeded 20% for 0% (Doppler), 11 % (STO), and 28% (HDO) of the sets of readings. After readings that exceeded a 20% coefficient of variation were discarded, repeatability was within 25 (Doppler), 37 (STO), and 39 (HDO) mm Hg for SAP. Correlation of mean values among the devices was between 0.47 and 0.63. Compared with Doppler readings, STO underestimated and HDO overestimated SAP. Limits of agreement between mean readings of any 2 devices were wide. With the hypertension scale used to score SAP, the intraclass correlation of scores was 0.48. Linear-weighted inter-rater reliability between scores was 0.40 (Doppler vs STO), 0.38 (Doppler vs HDO), and 0.29 (STO vs HDO).

Conclusions and Clinical Relevance—Results of this study suggested that no meaningful clinical comparison can be made between blood pressure readings obtained from the same dog with different indirect blood pressure measurement devices.

Contributor Notes

Dr. Wernick's present address is Clinic for Zoo Animals, Exotic Pets and Wildlife, Vetsuisse Faculty, University of Zurich, 8057 Zurich, Switzerland.

Dr. Howard and Dr. Francey contributed equally to the study.

Address correspondence to Dr. Howard (judith.howard@vetsuisse.unibe.ch).