Skip to main content
Figure 3 | BMC Nephrology

Figure 3

From: Optimising the accuracy of blood pressure monitoring in chronic kidney disease: the utility of BpTRU

Figure 3

Comparison between DINAMAP PRO400 and BpTRU measurements. A. Bar graph showing comparison between routine clinic systolic BP, systolic BP measured with the DINAMAP PRO400 monitor in a quiet room, and systolic BP recorded with BpTRU. ANOVA (repeated measures) showed a significant overall difference (P < 0.0001); Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test showed that the routine clinic reading was significantly higher than both the reading with the DINAMAP PRO400 monitor in the quiet room (P < 0.001) and the BpTRU reading (P < 0.001). The BpTRU reading was also significantly lower than the reading with a DINAMAP PRO400 monitor in the quiet room (P < 0.001). B. Bar graph showing comparison between mean diastolic BP values, measured as described in A. ANOVA (repeated measures) showed a significant overall difference (P = 0.0073); Bonferroni’s multiple comparison post hoc test showed that the routine clinic reading was significantly higher than both the reading taken with the DINAMAP PRO400 monitor in a quiet room (P < 0.05) and the reading taken with BpTRU (P < 0.05).

Back to article page