Home Articles Downloads Forum Products Services EBME Expo Contact
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate Thread
Joined: Jan 2021
Posts: 3
rudied Offline OP
Newbie
OP Offline
Newbie
Joined: Jan 2021
Posts: 3
Hi. What is the best method to test for accuracy of dynamic pressures in nibp bpm found at doctor surgeries? If it had static measurement capabilities, that would be easy. I get too much variance in results if using a unisim vital signs simulator. Please help

Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,341
Likes: 23
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,341
Likes: 23
There are so many variables that you haven't mentioned:-

1) Are the devices all of the same type (manufacturer and model)?
2) How many have you tested?
3) Are results reproducible?
4) Are cuff sizes all the same (and in good condition)?
5) Are the hoses all the same (condition, length)?
6) Are you concerned about pressure or BPM (or both)?
7) What sort of % variance are you experiencing?

Depending on which algorithms are used by various manufacturers, you may never get accurate dynamic results; but regardless of the tester being used, after testing a lot of NIBP units (of whatever type), and if you keep records, after some time you you will get a feel for when one or another results are outside "expected norms".


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.
1 member likes this: Huw
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 57
Likes: 10
Scholar
Offline
Scholar
Joined: Nov 2000
Posts: 57
Likes: 10
We have a Fluke ProSim4 Vital Signs Simulator that we use for such devices but generally we know how to get in to the engineering / verification mode.

Where a user has managed to purchase a device we cannot find information on we use the simulator and keep records on that particular monitor and refer back to them.

Depending on the algotithm the manufacturer uses you should get consistent results using a simulator such as the Fluke.


Solihull Hospital
University Hospitals Birmingham
1 member likes this: Huw
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,889
Likes: 21
Hero
Offline
Hero
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 1,889
Likes: 21
Its been qite a while since I put an NIBP machine on test, but I always considered a mercy sphyg the most accurate comparison for pressure.

The NIBP test devices from companies like Ultramedic and Rigel should be more than sufficient for doing planned maintenance inspections. (So long as they are calibrated)

If you are doing research - then a mercury column (mmHg) would my 'go to'.
After all - that is the measurement (mmHg) you are trying to check.


Be Proactive and reactive.
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,341
Likes: 23
Super Hero
Offline
Super Hero
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 14,341
Likes: 23
Happy days, John, happy days.

In my view, there's nothing wrong with reverting to First Principles ... in fact I would encourage all biomeds to think in that way ("adopting the mind-set", you might say).

After all, how accurate does this ward-based "vital signs" kit need to be, anyway?

See also electronic thermometers (expensive) - versus - mercury thermometers (accurate, and cheap).

Not so sure about Pulse Oximeters, though (unless my own finger is deemed good enough).


If you don't inspect ... don't expect.

Moderated by  DaveC in Oz, RoJo 

Link Copied to Clipboard
Who's Online Now
1 members (Neil Porter), 86 guests, and 20 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
Kemalin, Mendonça, StevenR, enesorin, Mirza
9,850 Registered Users
Forum Statistics
Forums25
Topics10,755
Posts72,469
Members9,850
Most Online5,980
Jan 29th, 2020
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5