title: Agreement between two oscillometric blood pressure technologies and invasively measured arterial pressure in the dog.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare two commonly used oscillometric technologies for obtaining noninvasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurements and to determine if there is a difference in agreement between these systems and invasive blood pressure (IBP) measurements.
  
  
  METHODS
  Prospective, experimental study.
  
  
  METHODS
  Twenty adult laboratory dogs.
  
  
  METHODS
  Each dog was anesthetized and its median caudal artery catheterized for IBP monitoring. An NIBP cuff was placed in the middle third of the antebrachium and attached to either monitor-1 or monitor-2. Four pairs of concurrent NIBP and IBP measurements were recorded with each monitor. Agreement between IBP and NIBP measurements was explored using Bland-Altman analysis, as well as the American College of Veterinary Internal Medicine (ACVIM) and Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) guidelines for the validation of NIBP devices.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Both NIBP technologies produced results that met the ACVIM and AAMI guidelines for the validation of NIBP devices. For monitor-1, analyses of agreement showed biases of 0.2 mmHg [95% limits of agreement (LoA) -11.8 to 12.3 mmHg] in systolic arterial pressure (SAP) values, -2.6 mmHg (95% LoA -14.4 to 9.1 mmHg) in diastolic arterial pressure (DAP) values, and -2.5 mmHg (95% LoA -12.7 to 7.3 mmHg) in mean arterial pressure (MAP) values. For monitor-2, analyses of agreement showed biases of 3.4 mmHg (95% LoA -8.7 to 15.5 mmHg) in SAP values, 2.2 mmHg (95% LoA -6.6 to 10.9 mmHg) in DAP values, and 1.6 mmHg (95% LoA -5.9 to 8.9 mmHg) in MAP values.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Multi-function monitors can contain components from various manufacturers. Clinicians should consider whether these have been validated in the species to be monitored. Both of the technologies studied here seem appropriate for use in dogs.
authors.affiliation: Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Anderson F
authors.initials: AF
authors.lastname: da Cunha
authors.affiliation: Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Sara J
authors.initials: SJ
authors.lastname: Ramos
authors.affiliation: Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Michelle
authors.initials: M
authors.lastname: Domingues
authors.affiliation: Health Sciences Centre, Ontario Veterinary College, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, Canada.
authors.forename: Hugues
authors.initials: H
authors.lastname: Beaufrère
authors.affiliation: Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Amanda
authors.initials: A
authors.lastname: Shelby
authors.affiliation: Division of Laboratory Animal Medicine, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Rhett
authors.initials: R
authors.lastname: Stout
authors.affiliation: Department of Veterinary Clinical Sciences, School of Veterinary Medicine, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, LA, USA.
authors.forename: Mark J
authors.initials: MJ
authors.lastname: Acierno
mesh_terms: D000818:Animals; D062186:Arterial Pressure; D001795:Blood Pressure Determination / Q000379:methods / Q000662:veterinary*; D004285:Dogs; D005260:Female; D008297:Male; D009991:Oscillometry / Q000662:veterinary; D011446:Prospective Studies; D013045:Species Specificity
keywords: IBP; NIBP; canine; comparison; monitoring