Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://hdl.handle.net/10662/14683
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorMazoteras Pardo, Victoria-
dc.contributor.authorBecerro de Bengoa Vallejo, Ricardo-
dc.contributor.authorLosa Iglesias, Marta Elena-
dc.contributor.authorLópez López, Daniel-
dc.contributor.authorCalvo Lobo, César-
dc.contributor.authorRodríguez Sanz, David-
dc.contributor.authorMartínez Jiménez, Eva María-
dc.contributor.authorPalomo López, Patricia-
dc.date.accessioned2022-05-12T10:09:40Z-
dc.date.available2022-05-12T10:09:40Z-
dc.date.issued2020-
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10662/14683-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Hypertension is a global public health issue and is closely related to chronic kidney disorder (CKD). In people with CKD, strict monitoring of blood pressure is an important part of therapy. Objective: The aim of this research was to validate the iHealth Track blood pressure monitoring device for patients with CKD according to the European Society of Hypertension International Protocol 2010 (ESH-IP2). Methods: In total, 33 patients who received hemodialysis in Plasencia participated in the study. There were 9 successive measurements made, which conformed to the ESH-IP2. We calculated the differences between the standard reference device (Omron M3 Intellisense) and the test device (iHealth Track) for blood pressure and heart rate values. For 99 total comparisons of paired measurements, we classified differences into various categories (≤5 mmHg, ≤10 mmHg, and ≤15 mmHg for blood pressure; ≤3, ≤5, and ≤8 beats per minute for heart rate). Results: In 90 of 99 systolic blood pressure and 89 of 99 diastolic blood pressure comparisons between the devices, measurement differences were within 5 mmHg. In 81 of 99 heart rate comparisons between the devices, measurement differences were within 3 beats per minute. The mean differences between the test and reference standard measurements were 3.27 (SD 2.99) mmHg for systolic blood pressure, 3.59 (SD 4.55) mmHg for diastolic blood pressure, and 2.18 (SD 2.75) beats per minute for heart rate. We also observed that for both systolic and diastolic blood pressure, 31 of 33 participants had at least two of three comparisons between the devices with measurement differences less than 5 mmHg. For heart rate, 28 of 33 patients had at least two of three comparisons between the devices with measurement differences less than 3 beats per minute. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to show that iHealth Track meets the requirements of the ESH-IP2 in patients with CKD. Therefore, the iHealth Track is suitable for use in renal patients.es_ES
dc.format.extent9 p.es_ES
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherJMIR Publicationses_ES
dc.rightsAttribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/*
dc.subjectiHealth Trackes_ES
dc.subjectInternational Protocoles_ES
dc.subjectHeart ratees_ES
dc.subjectBlood pressurees_ES
dc.subjectValidationes_ES
dc.subjectValidaciónes_ES
dc.subjectProtocolo Internacionales_ES
dc.subjectPresión arteriales_ES
dc.subjectRitmo cardiacoes_ES
dc.titleAn automated blood pressure display for self-measurement in patients with chronic kidney disease (iHealth Track): Device validation studyes_ES
dc.typearticlees_ES
dc.description.versionpeerReviewedes_ES
europeana.typeTEXTen_US
dc.rights.accessRightsopenAccesses_ES
dc.subject.unesco3207.04 Patología Cardiovasculares_ES
dc.subject.unesco3311.02 Ingeniería de Controles_ES
dc.subject.unesco3205.06 Nefrologíaes_ES
europeana.dataProviderUniversidad de Extremadura. Españaes_ES
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationMazoteras-Pardo, V., Becerro-De-Bengoa-Vallejo, R., Losa-Iglesias, M.E., López-López, D., Calvo-Lobo, C., Rodríguez-Sanz, D., Martínez-Jiménez, E. M., & Palomo-López, P. (2020). An Automated Blood Pressure Display for Self-Measurement in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease (iHealth Track): Device Validation Study. JMIR mHealth and uHealth, 8(4), e14702. https://doi.org/10.2196/14702es_ES
dc.type.versionpublishedVersiones_ES
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidad de Complutense de Madrides_ES
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidad de Extremadura. Departamento de Enfermeríaes_ES
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidad Rey Juan Carlos-
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidade da Coruña-
dc.contributor.affiliationUniversidad Castilla la Mancha-
dc.relation.publisherversionhttps://mhealth.jmir.org/2020/4/e14702/es_ES
dc.identifier.doi10.2196/14702-
dc.identifier.publicationissue4es_ES
dc.identifier.publicationfirstpagee14702-1es_ES
dc.identifier.publicationlastpagee14702-9es_ES
dc.identifier.publicationvolume8es_ES
dc.identifier.e-issn2291-5222-
Appears in Collections:DENFE - Artículos

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
14702.pdf196,21 kBAdobe PDFView/Open


This item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons