J Clin Pharmacol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Terra, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Kazierad, D. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Terra, S. G.
Right arrow Articles by Kazierad, D. J.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

METHODS

Evaluation of Methods for Improving Precision of Blood Pressure Measurements in Phase I Clinical Trials

Steven G. Terra, PharmD, Robert A. Blum, PharmD, Greg C. Wei, PhD, Robert A. Lew, PhD, Andres G. Digenio, MD, PhD, Iris Rajman, MD, PhD and David J. Kazierad, PharmD

From Pfizer Global Research & Development, Groton, Connecticut (Dr. Terra, Dr. Wei, Dr. Lew, Dr. Digenio, Dr. Rajman, Dr. Kazierad) and Buffalo Clinical Research Center, Buffalo, New York (Dr. Blum).

Small sample sizes are typically incorporated in early Phase I clinical studies, which may lead to insignificant changes in safety parameters such as blood pressure. Therefore, it is paramount to identify an optimal, noninvasive method of accurately measuring blood pressure and an appropriate analysis strategy yielding the smallest variability. The goals of this study were (1) to compare the variability between automated and manual blood pressure measurements, (2) to determine whether triplicate blood pressure measurements were independent of one another, and (3) to assess how the number of blood pressure readings affects variability and study sample size. Twenty healthy volunteers were enrolled in this randomized, two-way crossover study. Each subject received three incremental infusions of phenylephrine or normal saline on separate days to simulate blood pressure variability. The mean systolic blood pressure readings with the automated device were consistently higher than the manual device by 3 to 5 mmHg. Conversely, the mean diastolic blood pressure readings with the automated device were consistently 3 to 5 mmHg lower than the manual device. However, the variability and absolute change in blood pressure were essentially identical with manual and automated methods. No systematic order effects such as the first blood pressure reading always being higher were detected, suggesting that the triplicate readings were independent of one another and that an interval of 2 minutes between readings is adequate. Compared to a single measurement, collecting blood pressure in triplicate results in a 40% lower sample size needed to detect a 5-mmHg difference in systolic blood pressure.

Key Words: Automated and manual blood pressure measurements • triplicate blood pressure readings • blood pressure variability • clinical studies • Phase I research setting

Address for reprints: Steven G. Terra, PharmD, Pfizer Global Research & Development, 445 Eastern Point Road, BLDG 260/2505, Groton, CT 06340.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 PediatricsHome page
A. F. Duncan, C. R. Rosenfeld, J. S. Morgan, N. Ahmad, and R. J. Heyne
Interrater Reliability and Effect of State on Blood Pressure Measurements in Infants 1 to 3 Years of Age
Pediatrics, September 1, 2008; 122(3): e590 - e594.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Am J Health Syst PharmHome page
S. A. Shah, L. Schlesselman, D. Cios, J. Lipeika, A. A. Patel, J. Kluger, and C. M. White
Effects of echinacea on electrocardiographic and blood pressure measurements
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., August 1, 2007; 64(15): 1615 - 1618.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
S. A Shah, S. Sander, D. Cios, J. Lipeika, J. Kluger, and C M. White
Electrocardiographic and Hemodynamic Effects of Coenzyme Q10 in Healthy Individuals: A Double-Blind, Randomized Controlled Trial
Ann. Pharmacother., March 1, 2007; 41(3): 420 - 425.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the American College of Clinical Pharmacology