Home About us Current issue Ahead of Print Back issues Submission Instructions Advertise Contact Login   

Search Article 
Advanced search 
Saudi Journal of Kidney Diseases and Transplantation
Users online: 2766 Home Bookmark this page Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font size Increase font size 

ORIGINAL ARTICLE Table of Contents   
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 27  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 241-249
Blood pressure measurement in hemodialysis: The importance of the measurement technique

1 Department of Nephrology, Unichristus Medical School; Department of Nephrology, Federal University of Ceará, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil
2 Department of Nephrology, Federal University of Ceará, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil
3 Department of Nephrology, Unichristus Medical School, Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil

Correspondence Address:
Claudia Maria Costa de Oliveira
Department of Nephrology, Unichristus Medical School, Fortaleza, Ceará; Federal University of Ceará, Fortaleza, Ceará
Login to access the Email id

DOI: 10.4103/1319-2442.178251

PMID: 26997376

Rights and Permissions

Systemic arterial hypertension contributes to the high cardiovascular morbidity in hemodialysis (HD) patients, but the accuracy of blood pressure (BP) measurement in this population has not been well studied. To evaluate the agreement between BP measurement using the routine measurement technique (usual method) and the technique recommended by the VII Joint (standard method). This cross-sectional study enrolled 124 patients in a single center who had undergone dialysis for more than three months and were 18 years of age or older. The BP was verified at the start of dialysis by the nursing team (usual method) and by the researchers (standard method). The agreement between the systolic and diastolic BP (SBP and DBP) measurements was tested by the Bland-Altman analysis. A difference in BP measurement higher than ±5 mm Hg was considered clinically significant. The studied group had a mean age of 53.2 years. The average difference between routine and standard BP measurement was −6 mm Hg for SBP (limits of agreement: −40.1-28 mm Hg; P <0.001) and −5.6 mm Hg for DBP (limits of agreement: −33.1-21.8 mm Hg; P <0.001). A clinically significant difference in BP measured by both methods was observed in 69.4% of the patients for SBP and in 61.3% for DBP. The disagreement between the results of different BP measurement methods in HD patients was significant and the BP was underestimated using the usual BP method. BP measurement standardization should be encouraged to avoid errors in diagnosis and therapy.

Print this article  Email this article

  Similar in PUBMED
    Search Pubmed for
    Search in Google Scholar for
   Citation Manager
  Access Statistics
   Reader Comments
   Email Alert *
   Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded518    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal