Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Triage measurements in the emergency department overestimate blood pressure
  1. Joshua Wren1,
  2. Modurodoluwa Adetola2,
  3. Emily Ainsworth2,
  4. Megan Doherty2,
  5. Ali Hussain2,
  6. Andrew Scott2,
  7. Lydia Mary Joy Whalley2,
  8. Steve Goodacre3
  1. 1Sheffield Teaching Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Sheffield, UK
  2. 2The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  3. 3School of Health and Related Research (ScHARR), University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr Joshua Wren; j.wren{at}nhs.net

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Patients who present to the ED usually have their BP measured as part of their routine triage assessment. BP measurements suggesting hypertension (≥140 systolic or ≥90 diastolic1) are a frequent incidental finding, unrelated to the patient’s presenting complaint, but require follow-up.2 Hypertension is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events, so its detection in ED may be an opportunity to initiate further investigations and management.3 Guidance produced by the National Institute of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommends that BP readings are conducted in a calm environment with the patient seated, using an appropriately sized cuff on an outstretched and supported arm. If the initial BP reading is elevated, a second reading is recommended, with a subsequent third reading performed if the second reading is substantially different from the first. The recorded BP is then the lower of the last two measurements.1

Limited availability of time and space at ED triage means that BP …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Handling editor Aileen McCabe

  • Contributors This project was designed by SG and supervised by SG and JW. MA, EA, MD, AH, AS and LMJW all undertook data collection and analysis. Final write-up and submission was undertaken by JW.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.