Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 25, 2026

Pulse Wave Velocity Testing in the Baltimore Longitudinal Study of Aging
Published on: February 7, 2014
Pulse arrival time is not an adequate surrogate for pulse transit time in terms of tracking diastolic pressure
Guanqun Zhang1, Da Xu, N Bari Olivier
1Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. zhanggu2@msu.edu
Insights
Pulse transit time (PTT) is more accurate than pulse arrival time (PAT) for tracking diastolic pressure (DP). PTT achieved lower error rates in predicting DP, making it the recommended method for monitoring this vital sign.
Area of Science:
- Cardiovascular Physiology
- Biomedical Engineering
- Medical Monitoring
Background:
- Accurate tracking of diastolic pressure (DP) is crucial for cardiovascular health assessment.
- Pulse arrival time (PAT) and pulse transit time (PTT) are non-invasive methods explored for DP monitoring.
- Comparing the efficacy of PAT and PTT in dynamic physiological conditions is essential.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the accuracy of pulse arrival time (PAT) and pulse transit time (PTT) in tracking diastolic pressure (DP).
- To determine which pulse wave parameter, PAT or PTT, provides more reliable DP estimations.
- To evaluate the performance of PAT and PTT under varying hemodynamic conditions.
Main Methods:
- Invasive, high-fidelity arterial waveforms were recorded from six dogs.
- Multiple interventions were performed to induce a wide range of diastolic pressure (40-106 mmHg).
- Pulse arrival time (PAT) and pulse transit time (PTT) were calculated and correlated with invasive DP measurements.
Main Results:
- Pulse transit time (PTT) predicted diastolic pressure (DP) with a lower average root-mean-squared-error (5.7 ± 2.0 mmHg) compared to pulse arrival time (PAT) (9.8 ± 5.8 mmHg).
- The difference in prediction accuracy between PTT and PAT was statistically significant (p = 0.02).
- Both methods showed variability, but PTT demonstrated superior performance across the tested DP range.
Conclusions:
- Pulse transit time (PTT) is a more accurate and reliable method for tracking diastolic pressure (DP) than pulse arrival time (PAT).
- Despite PAT's simpler measurement, PTT's enhanced accuracy supports its recommendation for clinical use in DP monitoring.
- Further research may explore PTT's utility in diverse clinical settings and patient populations.
Abstract:
We compared pulse arrival time (PAT) and pulse transit time (PTT) in terms of their ability to track diastolic pressure (DP). We performed the comparison using high fidelity, invasive arterial waveforms recorded from six dogs during multiple interventions. On average, DP ranged from 40 to 106 mmHg and therefore varied widely. PAT and PTT were able to predict DP with average root-mean-squared-errors of 9.8 ± 5.8 mmHg and 5.7 ± 2.0 mmHg (p = 0.02). Thus, even though PAT is simpler to measure, we can only recommend using PTT for tracking DP.
Related Concept Videos
Special considerations while measuring pulse
Pulse
The pulse serves as a clinical indicator...
Pulse
Pulse Rate and its Significance
Pulse rate, often measured in beats per minute (bpm), reflects the heart rate (HR), which is influenced by numerous factors such as stress, physical activity, and hormonal changes. A normal resting adult pulse rate falls between...
Pulse rhythm
Conversely, an irregular pulse pattern is termed dysrhythmia, stemming from disruptions in cardiac muscle...
Sites for measuring blood pressure
The Brachial Artery: Primary Site for Blood Pressure Measurement
Measurement of Blood Pressure
