Dean Picone

Mr. Dean Picone


Research Focus & Metrics

Academic Career Length

12Years (2015-Present)

(Calculated once Scilit publication data is synced: current year − year of first publication + 1)

Representative Publications

View All Publications
1 August 2017 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
MSMartin G. Schultz
Martin G. Schultz
POPetr Otahal
Petr Otahal
SASvend Aakhus
Svend Aakhus
AAAhmed M. Al-Jumaily
Ahmed M. Al-Jumaily
JSJames Sharman
James Sharman

1 October 2015 in JACC
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MSMartin Schultz
Martin Schultz
POPetr Otahal
Petr Otahal
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
JSJames Sharman
James Sharman

1 May 2019 in Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
PDF file
MAMatthew K. Armstrong
Matthew K. Armstrong
MSMartin G. Schultz
Martin G. Schultz
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
JBJ. Andrew Black
J. Andrew Black
NDNathan Dwyer
Nathan Dwyer
JSJames E. Sharman
James E. Sharman
Radial intra-arterial blood pressure (BP) is sometimes used as the reference standard for validation of brachial cuff BP devices. Moreover, there is an emerging wearables market seeking to measure BP at the wrist. However, radial systolic BP may differ when compared with brachial; yet some authors have labeled these differences as a fictional Popeye phenomenon. Indeed, differences between brachial and radial systolic BP have never been accurately quantified, and this was the aim of this study. Intra-arterial BP was measured consecutively at the brachial and radial artery in 180 participants undergoing coronary angiography (aged 61±10 years; 69% men). On average, radial systolic BP was 5.5 mm Hg higher than brachial systolic BP. Only 43% of participants had radial systolic BP within ±5 mm Hg of brachial. Additionally, 46%, 19%, and 13% of participants had radial systolic BP >5, between 5 and 10, and between 10 and 15 mm Hg higher than brachial respectively. A further 14% of participants had radial systolic BP >15 mm Hg higher than brachial, representing the so-called Popeye phenomenon. Finally, 11% of participants had radial systolic BP >5 mm Hg lower than brachial. In conclusion, radial systolic BP is not representative of brachial systolic BP, with most participants having a radial systolic BP >5 mm Hg higher than brachial and many with differences >15 mm Hg. Therefore, validation testing of BP devices utilizing intra-arterial BP as the reference standard should use intra-arterial BP measured at the same site as the brachial cuff or wearable device.

1 December 2016 in Journal of Science and Medicine in Sport
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
MSMartin G. Schultz
Martin G. Schultz
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
SNSonja B. Nikolic
Sonja B. Nikolic
AWAndrew D. Williams
Andrew D. Williams
JSJames Sharman
James Sharman

1 March 2025 in Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Closed access
SMShiva Raj Mishra
Shiva Raj Mishra
GSGautam Satheesh
Gautam Satheesh
VVVishnu Vishnu
Vishnu Vishnu
Tu Ngoc NguyenTu Ngoc Nguyen
Tu Ngoc Nguyen
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
RLRichard I. Lindley
Richard I. Lindley

5 October 2020 in The Journal of Clinical Hypertension
Verified
Journal Article
Open access
PDF file
DPDean Picone
Dean Picone
RPRaj Padwal
Raj Padwal
NCNorm Campbell
Norm Campbell
PBPierre Boutouyrie
Pierre Boutouyrie
TBTammy M. Brady
Tammy M. Brady
FCfor the Accuracy in Measurement of Blood Pressure (AIM‐BP) Collaborative
for the Accuracy in Measurement of Blood Pressure (AIM‐BP) Collaborative
Hypertension guidelines recommend that blood pressure (BP) should be measured using a monitor that has passed validation testing for accuracy. BP monitors that have not undergone rigorous validation testing can still be cleared by regulatory authorities for marketing and sale. This is the situation for most BP monitors worldwide. Thus, consumers (patients, health professionals, procurement officers, and general public) may unwittingly purchase BP monitors that are non‐validated and more likely to be inaccurate. Without prior knowledge of these issues, it is extremely difficult for consumers to distinguish validated from non‐validated BP monitors. For the above reasons, the aim of this paper is to provide consumers guidance on how to check whether a BP monitor has been properly validated for accuracy. The process involves making an online search of listings of BP monitors that have been assessed for validation status. Only those monitors that have been properly validated are recommended for BP measurement. There are numerous different online listings of BP monitors, several are country‐specific and two are general (international) listings. Because monitors can be marketed using alternative model names in different countries, if a monitor is not found on one listing, it may be worthwhile cross‐checking with a different listing. This information is widely relevant to anyone seeking to purchase a home, clinic, or ambulatory BP monitor, including individual consumers for use personally or policy makers and those procuring monitors for use in healthcare systems, and retailers looking to stock only validated BP monitors.