Evaluation of the Technique Used by Health-Care Workers for Taking Blood Pressure

Author:

Villegas Iván1,Arias Isabel C.1,Botero Adriana1,Escobar Alejandro1

Affiliation:

1. From the Renal Unit, Clínica León XIII, Instituto de Seguros Sociales (I.V.), and Instituto de Ciencias de La Salud, CES, Medellín, Colombia.

Abstract

Abstract The precise guidelines recommended by the American Heart Association for blood pressure measurement are commonly overlooked by health-care workers, who generally take blood pressure in an arbitrary way. To validate this observation we designed a descriptive and observational study to be carried out in a major hospital. One hundred and seventy-two health-care workers divided into four groups (63 general practitioners, 25 clinical and 25 surgical specialists, and 59 nurses) were evaluated in a two-part test. In the first part (practical), the examinee had to follow all the steps recommended by the American Heart Association to get a passing score. In the second part (theoretical, which came second to avoid influencing the practical), the examinee had to answer correctly 7 of 10 questions based on the American Heart Association’s guidelines to obtain a passing score. The highest accepted variation in systolic and diastolic pressures between examinee and observer was ±4 mm Hg. None of the examinees followed the American Heart Association’s recommendations. Sixty-three percent of systolic and 53% of diastolic readings were out of range. Surgical specialists obtained the best practical results (48% systolic and 64% diastolic within range), and nurses obtained the lowest values (29% and 39%, respectively; P =.03 versus surgical specialists). These two groups showed deficiencies in the theoretical test (nurses, 10% correct answers and surgical specialists, 16%). Clinical specialists obtained the best results on the theoretical test (60% correct; P <.05 versus the other groups) but were deficient in the practical test (32% systolic and 60% diastolic within range). In conclusion, on practical and theoretical bases health-care workers took blood pressure inaccurately and incorrectly.

Publisher

Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

Subject

Internal Medicine

Reference8 articles.

Cited by 83 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3