Hemodynamics, fluids & transfusion
Diagnostic Accuracy of Arm Conicity to Detect Inaccurate Non‐Invasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Obese Patients
Authors' conclusion
Inaccurate measurements were common. Right arm conicity, mid-arm circumference and BMI were poor classifiers of NIBP measurement error at the pre-induction and intraoperative time points.
Study context
- Population
- Patients with body mass index (BMI) ≥ 35 kg/m² having elective surgery531 measurements
- Participants
- 141 patients
- Comparison
- Right arm slant angle (arm conicity), right mid-arm circumference and BMI as predictors of non-invasive blood pressure (NIBP) measurement error vs invasive BP
- Outcome
- NIBP measurement error (inaccuracy = > 10 mmHg difference from invasive measurement) for SBP and DBP
- Follow-up
- Pre-induction (T0) and 20 min post-induction
Methodological detailspost hoc analyses of under and over-estimation
- Post hoc analyses of under and over-estimation
Performance
As reported in the abstract
Prediction of inaccurate NIBP (AUROC) · T0 and T20
- All ROC curves for right arm slant angle, right mid-arm circumference and BMI approached a 45° line; Area under ROC curves (AUROCs) ranged from 0.47 (0.36, 0.57) to 0.64 (0.54, 0.74), poor diagnostic performance
Further findings
| Outcome | Right arm slant angle |
|---|---|
| Underestimation at T0 (post hoc)Best performer | |
| AUROC DBP | 0.63 (0.51, 0.75) |
| AUROC SBP | 0.69 (0.59, 0.78) |
Frequency of inaccurate NIBP measurements · T0 and T20
- SBP inaccurate (150 of 265)
- 56.7%
- DBP inaccurate (113 of 266)
- 42.5%
Original publication
Diagnostic Accuracy of Arm Conicity to Detect Inaccurate Non‐Invasive Blood Pressure Measurement in Obese Patients. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. Published 14 April 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →