Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Original Article
  • Published:

Unsafe health and safety: sphygmomanometer cuffs are not interchangeable

Journal of Human Hypertension volume 27, pages 434–436 (2013)Cite this article

Subjects

Abstract

Unknown to its hypertension specialists, a major teaching hospital changed the cuffs on its sphygmomanometers from manufacturer-validated to a uniform washable alternative, in line with ‘Health and Safety’ concerns surrounding potential cross-contamination between patients. When clinic doctors suspected serious under-reading with the new cuffs, a systematic comparison was undertaken in 54 patients (mean±s.d. age, 61±17 years), using two UM-101 sphygmomanometers, one using the original, manufacturer-supplied cuff and the other with the washable replacement. The study confirmed an average under-reading of 8±10/5±5 mm Hg using the washable cuff, and a third of patients with poorly controlled hypertension were considered normotensive, after using this cuff. The UM-101 sphygmomanometers have now been re-fitted with the original cuffs. Sphygmomanometer cuffs are not interchangeable between devices and a modicum of common sense should be shown to prevent changes made in the name of Health and Safety from having the opposite effect to that intended.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

Figure 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Pickering T . The case for a hybrid sphygmomanometer. Blood Press Monit 2001; 6 (4): 177–179.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Stergiou GS, Giovas PP, Gkinos CP, Tzamouranis DG . Validation of the A&D UM-101 professional hybrid device for office blood pressure measurement according to the International Protocol. Blood Press Monit 2008; 13 (1): 37–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Baruah J, Kumar S, Gratix A, Dibb W, Madeo M . Blood pressure cuffs as a potential fomite for transmission of pathogenic micro-organisms: a prospective study in a university teaching hospital. J Infect Prev 2008; 9: 19–21.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Brown MJ, Cruickshank JK, Macdonald TM . Navigating the shoals in hypertension: discovery and guidance. BMJ 2012; 344: d8218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Williams B, Poulter NR, Brown MJ, Davis M, McInnes GT, Potter JF et al. British Hypertension Society guidelines for hypertension management 2004 (BHS-IV): summary. BMJ 2004; 328 (7440): 634–640.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. O’Brien E, Petrie J, Littler W, de Swiet M, Padfield PL, Altman DG et al. An outline of the revised British Hypertension Society protocol for the evaluation of blood pressure measuring devices. J Hypertens 1993; 11 (6): 677–679.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Falaschetti E, Chaudhury M, Mindell J, Poulter N . Continued improvement in hypertension management in England: results from the health survey for England 2006. Hypertension 2009; 53 (3): 480–486.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Lewington S, Clarke R, Qizilbash N, Peto R, Collins R . Age-specific relevance of usual blood pressure to vascular mortality: a meta-analysis of individual data for one million adults in 61 prospective studies. Lancet 2002; 360 (9349): 1903–1913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Bakx C, Oerlemans G, van den Hoogen H, van Weel C, Thien T . The influence of cuff size on blood pressure measurement. J Hum Hypertens 1997; 11 (7): 439–445.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Bellamy JE, Pugh H, Sanders DJ . The trouble with blood pressure cuffs. BMJ 2008; 337: a431.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the patients who kindly agreed to assist in the study and research staff within the Clinical Pharmacology Unit for their help. The PATHWAY trials are a multi-centre collaboration among principal investigators of the British Hypertension Society, and are funded by the British Heart Foundation and Comprehensive Local Research Networks. Dr Ian Wilkinson is a British Heart Foundation Senior Clinical Fellow. This work was supported, in part, by the NIHR Cambridge Biomedical Research Centre.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Clinical Pharmacology Unit, University of Cambridge, Addenbrooke’s Hospital,, Cambridge, UK

    K C Shaw, C M McEniery, I B Wilkinson & M J Brown

Authors
  1. K C Shaw
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. C M McEniery
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. I B Wilkinson
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. M J Brown
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to M J Brown.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Shaw, K., McEniery, C., Wilkinson, I. et al. Unsafe health and safety: sphygmomanometer cuffs are not interchangeable. J Hum Hypertens 27, 434–436 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2012.51

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jhh.2012.51

Keywords

Search

Advanced search

Quick links