Abstract
The mercury sphygmomanometer was introduced over 100 years ago. Mercury, however, is a potent human neurotoxin. An international effort has developed to eliminate health-care sources of mercury – the thermometer and sphygmomanometer – and replace them with less toxic alternatives. There is concern regarding the accuracy of these alternative devices. We conducted a literature review of articles published between 1995 and 2009 evaluating the accuracy of mercury, aneroid, and oscillometric blood pressure devices. Mercury sphygmomanometers fared the best although they do not always perform as expected, failing calibration tests between 1 and 28 per cent of the time. Up to 61 per cent of aneroid sphygmomanometers failed. Recently calibrated aneroid devices performed well. Oscillometric devices were less studied and their performance was variable. All three devices showed variable performance. They should be validated before purchase and calibrated on a regular basis.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
United Nations Environmental Programme. (2002) Global Mercury Assessment. Geneva: UNEP Chemicals.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (1997) Mercury Study Report to Congress. Volume II: An Inventory of Anthropogenic Mercury Emissions in the United States. EPA-452/R-97004, Table ES-3, December 1997.
Health Canada. (2009) Mercury. Your health and the environment, http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/contaminants/mercur/q47-q56_e.html, accessed 20 October 2009.
United States Environmental Protection Agency. (2009) Environmental effects: Fate and transport and ecological effects of mercury, http://www.epa.gov/mercury/eco.htm, accessed 20 April 2009.
Pickering, T.G. et al (2005) Recommendations for blood pressure measurement in humans and experimental animals, part 1: Blood pressure measurement in humans: A statement for professionals from the Subcommittee of Professional and Public Education of the American Heart Association Council on High Blood Pressure Research. Hypertension 45: 142–161.
O'Brien, E. et al (2003) European Society of Hypertension recommendations for conventional, ambulatory and home blood pressure measurement. Journal of Hypertension 21 (5): 821–848.
Hospitals for a Healthy Environment. (2009) Regulated medical waste reduction, http://www.h2e-online.org/, accessed 3 February 2009.
National Heart, Blood and Lung Institute. (2004) The Seventh Report of the Joint National Committee on Prevention, Detection, Evaluation and Treatment of High Blood Pressure: US Department of Health and Human Services. August 2004, http://www.nhlbi.nih.gov/guidelines/hypertension/jnc7full.pdf, accessed 18 February 2009.
O'Brien, E., Waeber, B., Parati, G., Staessen, J. and Myers, M.G. (2001) Blood pressure measuring devices: Recommendations of the European Society of Hypertension. British Medical Journal 322: 531–536.
Jones, D., Frohlich, E., Grim, C., Grim, C. and Taubert, K. (2001) Mercury sphygmomanometers should not be abandoned: An advisory statement from the Council for High Blood Pressure Research, American Heart Association. Hypertension 37: 185–186.
Waugh, J., Gupta, M., Rushbrook, J., Halligan, A. and Shennan, A.H. (2002) Hidden errors of aneroid sphygmomanometers. Blood Pressure Monitoring 7 (6): 309–312.
Mion, D. and Pierin, A.M.G. (1998) How accurate are sphygmomanometers? Journal of Human Hypertension 12: 245–248.
Knight, T. et al (2001) Sphygmomanometers in use in general practice: An overlooked aspect of quality in patient care. Journal of Human Hypertension 15: 681–684.
Ashworth, M., Gordon, K., Baker, G. and Deshmukh, A. (2001) Sphygmomanometer calibration: A survey of one inner-city primary care group. Journal of Human Hypertension 15: 259–262.
Ali, S. and Rouse, A. (2002) Practice audits: Reliability of sphygmomanometers and blood pressure recording bias. Journal of Human Hypertension 16: 359–361.
Shah, N., Sibbritt, D., Heaney, S. and Sharples, J. (2004) Sphygmomanometers: An audit in general practice. Australian Family Physician 33: 952–954.
Moore, T., Sorokin, A., Hirst, C., Thornton-Thompson, S. and Thompson, P. (2008) The accuracy of aneroid sphygmomanometers in the ambulatory setting. Preventive Cardiology (Spring): 90–94.
Kim, J. et al (2005) How well do clinic-based blood pressure measurements agree with the mercury standard? Journal of General Internal Medicine 20: 647–649.
Coleman, A.J., Steel, D.S., Ashworth, M., Vowler, S.L. and Shennan, A. (2005) Accuracy of the pressure scale of sphygmomanometers in clinical use within primary care. Blood Pressure Monitoring 10 (4): 181–188.
Gill, G., Ala, L., Gurgel, R. and Cuevas, L. (2004) Accuracy of aneroid sphygmomanometer blood pressure recording compared with digital and mercury measurements in Brazil. Tropical Doctor 34: 26–27.
Jones, D., Engelke, M., Brown, S. and Swanson, M. (1996) A comparison of two noninvasive methods of blood pressure measurement in the triage area. Journal of Emergency Nursing 22: 111–115.
McManus, R., Mant, F., Hull, M. and Gobbs, F. (2003) Does changing from mercury to electronic blood pressure measurement influence recorded blood pressure? An observational study. Journal of General Practice 53: 953–956.
Markandu, N.D., Whitcher, F., Arnold, A. and Carney, C. (2000) The mercury sphygmomanometer should be abandoned before it is proscribed. Journal of Human Hypertension 14: 31–36.
Yarows, S.A. and Qian, K. (2001) Accuracy of aneroid sphygmomanometers in clinical usage: University of Michigan experience. Blood Pressure Monitoring 6 (2): 101–106.
Canzanello, V.J., Jensen, P.L. and Schwartz, G.L. (2001) Are aneroid sphygmomanometers accurate in hospital and clinic settings? Archives of Internal Medicine 161: 729–731.
Ma, Y. et al (2009) Evaluating the accuracy of an aneroid sphygmomanometer in a clinical trial setting. American Journal of Hypertension 22 (3): 263–266.
Sims, A.J., Menes, J.A., Bousfield, D.R., Reay, C.A. and Murray, A. (2005) Automated non-invasive blood pressure devices: Are they suitable for use? Blood Pressure Monitoring 10: 275–281.
O'Brien, E. (2003) A website for blood pressure monitoring devices: dableducational.com. Blood Pressure Monitoring 8: 177.
Reims, H.M., Kjeldsen, S.E. and Mancia, G. (2005) Home blood pressure monitoring. European Society of Hypertension Scientific Newsletter: Update on hypertension management, Vol. 6, http://www.eshonline.org/Publications/Newsletter.aspx, accessed 4 March 2009.
British Hypertension Society. Validated blood pressure monitor list, http://www.bhsoc.org/blood_pressure_list.stm, accessed 4 March 2009.
Myers, M.G., McInnis, N.H., Fodor, G.J. and Leenen, F.H.H. (2008) Comparison between an automated and manual sphygmomanometer in a population survey. American Journal of Hypertension 21 (3): 280–283.
Heinemann, M., Sellick, K., Rickard, C., Reynolds, P. and McGrail, M. (2008) Automated versus manual blood pressure measurement: A randomized crossover trial. International Journal of Nursing Practice 14: 296–302.
Emergency Care Research Institute. (2003) Replacing mercury-column sphygmomanometers. Health Devices 32: 109–117.
World Health Organization. (2005) Department of protection of the human environment water, sanitation and health. Mercury in Health Care, August 2005.
Health Care Without Harm. (2008) End of an era. The phase-out of mercury-based blood pressure measurement devices in the United States and its implications for Europe and the rest of the world, http://www.noharm.org/seasia/reports/2008/sep/rep2008-09-22.php, accessed 3 April 2009.
Carney, S.L., Gillies, A.H.B., Green, S.L., Paterson, O., Taylor, M.S. and Smith, A.J. (1999) Hospital blood pressure measurement: Staff and device assessment. Journal of Quality in Clinical Practice 19: 95–98.
Rouse, A. and Marshall, T. (2001) The extent and implications of sphygmomanometer calibration error in primary care. Journal of Human Hypertension 15: 587–591.
Acknowledgements
Health Care Without Harm funded this work via a grant from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Success in global efforts to eliminate environmental mercury depends on finding accepted substitutes for mercury sphygmomanometers in the health sector. The authors assess non-mercury devices in a literature review.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Buchanan, S., Orris, P. & Karliner, J. Alternatives to the mercury sphygmomanometer. J Public Health Pol 32, 107–120 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1057/jphp.2010.38
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/jphp.2010.38