Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Continuous noninvasive blood pressure monitoring with wearable photoplethysmography

  • Moritz Flick
  • , Leon Gebhardt
  • , Alina Bergholz
  • , Kristen K. Thomsen
  • , Max Bossemeyer
  • , Alexander Hapfelmeier
  • , Julia Auinger
  • , Bernd Saugel
  • Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf
  • Outcomes Research Consortium

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

4 Scopus citations

Abstract

BACKGROUND – The Biobeat wrist monitor (BB-613W; Biobeat Technologies, Petah-Tikva, Israel) and the Biobeat chest monitor (BB-613P; Biobeat Technologies) are wearable solutions for continuous noninvasive blood pressure monitoring.OBJECTIVE(S) – We aimed to investigate the blood pressure measurement performance of the Biobeat wrist monitor and chest monitor after external calibration.DESIGN – A prospective method comparison study.SETTING – University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany.PATIENTS – Fifty high-risk patients recovering from noncardiac surgery in an advanced postanaesthesia care unit.MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES – We compared blood pressure measurements from the Biobeat wrist monitor (BPWRIST-ART) and the Biobeat chest monitor (BPCHEST-ART) with intra-arterial blood pressure measurements (BPART). In addition, we aimed to compare blood pressure measurements from the Biobeat wrist monitor (BPWRIST-OSCI) with those from an oscillometric upper-arm cuff (BPOSCI). We used Bland–Altman analysis, four-quadrant plot and error grid analysis for statistical analysis.RESULTS – The mean of the differences ± standard deviation (95%-limits of agreement) between BPWRIST-ART and BPART was 3 ± 11 mmHg (-19 to 25 mmHg) for mean blood pressure with a concordance rate to track 15-min blood pressure changes of 51%. The mean of the differences between BPCHEST-ART and BPART was 3 ± 11 mmHg (-17 to 24 mmHg) for mean blood pressure with a concordance rate to track 15-min blood pressure changes of 61%. The mean of the differences between BPWRIST-OSCI and BPOSCI was 6 ± 11 mmHg (-16 to 27 mmHg) for mean blood pressure with a concordance rate to track 15-min blood pressure changes of 49%.CONCLUSIONS – Blood pressure measurements from the Biobeat wrist monitor and the Biobeat chest monitor did not show clinically acceptable agreement either with intra-arterial blood pressure measurements or with blood pressure measurements from an oscillometric upper-arm cuff in high-risk patients recovering from noncardiac surgery in an advanced postanaesthesia care unit.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)74-82
Number of pages9
JournalEuropean Journal of Anaesthesiology
Volume43
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2026

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Continuous noninvasive blood pressure monitoring with wearable photoplethysmography'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this