Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 10, 2026
Measuring Blood Pressure in Mice using Volume Pressure Recording, a Tail-cuff Method
Published on: May 15, 2009
Miniature electronic blood pressure monitor compared with a blind-reading mercury sphygmomanometer in pregnancy
A J Dawson1, C Middlemiss, T F Vanner
1Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Wales College of Medicine, Cardiff, U.K.
The use of electronic blood pressure monitors is increasing, but they have received little evaluation in pregnancy. We compared an electronic monitor (Nissei D-175 Digital Monitor) with a London School of Hygiene blind-reading mercury sphygmomanometer in clinical conditions in 41 patients in the third trimester. In 141 comparisons, the electronic monitor read systolic pressures that were 16.53 mmHg higher on average than the mercury sphygmomanometer, the limits of agreement being from -9.13 mmHg to +42.19 mmHg. For diastolic pressures, the electronic monitor read 9.71 mmHg higher on average than the mercury sphygmomanometer, the limits of agreement being from -16.97 mmHg to +36.39 mmHg. The coefficient of repeatability was similar for both instruments with systolic and diastolic readings. As much caution should be exercised with the use of the electronic monitor in late pregnancy as with the mercury sphygmomanometer, and practitioners should be aware of the marked differences that can occur between instruments.
The use of electronic blood pressure monitors is increasing, but they have received little evaluation in pregnancy. We compared an electronic monitor (Nissei D-175 Digital Monitor) with a London School of Hygiene blind-reading mercury sphygmomanometer in clinical conditions in 41 patients in the third trimester. In 141 comparisons, the electronic monitor read systolic pressures that were 16.53 mmHg higher on average than the mercury sphygmomanometer, the limits of agreement being from -9.13 mmHg to +42.19 mmHg. For diastolic pressures, the electronic monitor read 9.71 mmHg higher on average than the mercury sphygmomanometer, the limits of agreement being from -16.97 mmHg to +36.39 mmHg. The coefficient of repeatability was similar for both instruments with systolic and diastolic readings. As much caution should be exercised with the use of the electronic monitor in late pregnancy as with the mercury sphygmomanometer, and practitioners should be aware of the marked differences that can occur between instruments.
More Related Videos
Related Concept Videos
01:21Sites for measuring blood pressure
The Brachial Artery: Primary Site for Blood Pressure Measurement
01:30Equipments Used To Measure Blood Pressure
This invasive approach involves cannulating a peripheral artery. During each cardiac contraction, pressure generates mechanical motion within the catheter, transmitted through rigid, fluid-filled tubing to a transducer. This transducer converts mechanical motion into electrical signals displayed as waveforms on a monitor. An automatic flushing system prevents blood backflow. Due to the potential risk of unexpected arterial blood loss, this method is primarily used in intensive...
01:15Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(one-step method)
Prepare for the Procedure:
01:23Assessment of blood pressure in brachial artery(two-step method)
01:28Special considerations while measuring blood pressure
Monitoring Both Arms:
Monitoring BP in both arms during the initial assessment is advisable, as the systolic value may differ by five to ten mm Hg between arms. For subsequent BP assessments, use the arm with the higher reading.
01:17Measurement of Blood Pressure