A comparative evaluation of the DINAMAP 8100 and DINAMAP Compact TS using a non-invasive blood pressure simulator

BACKGROUND: The Critikon DINAMAP 8100, although widely used in clinical practice, has been reported to measure the blood pressure with unacceptable systematic and non-systematic errors. The 8100 device has recently been succeeded by the Compact TS. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate two DINAMAP devices. METHODS: A non-invasive blood pressure simulator was used to evaluate the Compact TS in comparison with the 8100 over a range of pressures (60/30 to 200/150 mmHg), pulse rates (40-200 beats/min) and pulse strengths (down to 10% of the nominal pulse strength), with the addition of a simulated movement artefact. The ability of each monitor to measure the pressure consistently when presented with 30 repeated simulated waveforms at 120/80 mmHg was assessed. RESULTS: The Compact TS recorded more consistently than did the 8100 device, with an average SD over the pressure range of 1.45 mmHg compared with 2.22 mmHg. The average pressures recorded by the two monitors at the simulated 120/80 mmHg pressure were not statistically different. Although the two monitors recorded statistically significantly different pressures at some of the simulated pressures the differences were within 10 mmHg and hence not clinically significant. Both monitors underestimated the systolic blood pressure when they were presented with very weak oscillometric waveforms. The results suggest that the Compact TS may have lower non-systematic errors in clinical practice than does the 8100 device, but that systematic errors for the two monitors may be similar.