2 ms·
I think exactly the opposite. It's because you should take a measurement after 15 minutes of relaxation that it's useful to have a wearable monitor. Those condi
by modeless 3y ago
I think exactly the opposite. It's because you should take a measurement after 15 minutes of relaxation that it's useful to have a wearable monitor. Those conditions may happen naturally throughout the day, and can be detected by your watch automatically (via continuous heart rate monitoring plus accelerometer readings), so blood pressure readings can be taken serendipitously, which is way more convenient.
Also I think in theory true continuous blood pressure monitoring data ought to be a lot more informative than just resting blood pressure. We may not yet have the research to really draw conclusions yet, but it should become possible to do that research relatively quickly if a whole lot of continuous blood pressure data becomes available.
- kurthr 3y agoI agree that having a continuous measurement is more powerful, but one confounding factor is the location of the pressure measurement. If the measurement location goes up or down relative to your heart then that produces an error or offset in the measurement due to the weight of your blood. If you correct for this (and perhaps accelerations etc) with other measurements, then you can have a blood pressure measurement that is much less sensitive to physical motion. If you can estimate the pressures in the heart then you can make good estimates about many other nominal pressures elsewhere in the body.
- matheusmoreira 3y agoYes. Currently wrist blood pressure monitors must be level with the heart in order to be accurate. Can an unlevel measurement be corrected somehow? Would make the device much easier for patients to use. A lot of people don't know they need to hold it at the same level as the heart.