Assessment of the DIXTAL DX-2710 Automated Oscillometric Device for Blood Pressure Measurement with the Validation Protocols of the British Hypertension Society (BHS) and the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI)

OBJECTIVE: To assess the Dixtal DX2710 automated oscillometric device used for blood pressure measurement according to the protocols of the BHS and the AAMI. METHODS: Three blood pressure measurements were taken in 94 patients (53 females 15 to 80 years). The measurements were taken randomly by 2 observers trained to measure blood pressure with a mercury column device connected with an automated device. The device was classified according to the protocols of the BHS and AAMI. RESULT: The mean of blood pressure levels obtained by the observers was 148±38/93±25 mmHg and that obtained with the device was 148±37/89±26 mmHg. Considering the differences between the measurements obtained by the observer and those obtained with the automated device according to the criteria of the BHS, the following classification was adopted: "A" for systolic pressure (69% of the differences < 5; 90% < 10; and 97% < 15 mmHg); and "B" for diastolic pressure (63% of the differences < 5; 83% < 10; and 93% < 15 mmHg). The mean and standard deviation of the differences were 0±6.27 mmHg for systolic pressure and 3.82±6.21 mmHg for diastolic pressure. CONCLUSION: The Dixtal DX2710 device was approved according to the international recommendations.

BEYOND THE “LEAST LIMITING WATER RANGE”: RETHINKING SOIL PHYSICS RESEARCH IN BRAZIL

As opposed to objective definitions in soil physics, the subjective term “soil physical quality” is increasingly found in publications in the soil physics area. A supposed indicator of soil physical quality that has been the focus of attention, especially in the Brazilian literature, is the Least Limiting Water Range (RLL), translated in Portuguese as "Intervalo Hídrico Ótimo" or IHO. In this paper the four limiting water contents that define RLLare discussed in the light of objectively determinable soil physical properties, pointing to inconsistencies in the RLLdefinition and calculation. It also discusses the interpretation of RLL as an indicator of crop productivity or soil physical quality, showing its inability to consider common phenological and pedological boundary conditions. It is shown that so-called “critical densities” found by the RLL through a commonly applied calculation method are questionable. Considering the availability of robust models for agronomy, ecology, hydrology, meteorology and other related areas, the attractiveness of RLL as an indicator to Brazilian soil physicists is not related to its (never proven) effectiveness, but rather to the simplicity with which it is dealt. Determining the respective limiting contents in a simplified manner, relegating the study or concern on the actual functioning of the system to a lower priority, goes against scientific construction and systemic understanding. This study suggests a realignment of the research in soil physics in Brazil with scientific precepts, towards mechanistic soil physics, to replace the currently predominant search for empirical correlations below the state of the art of soil physics.

Experimental Method to Determine Some Physical Properties in Physics Classes

ABSTRACT Particle density, gravimetric and volumetric water contents and porosity are important basic concepts to characterize porous systems such as soils. This paper presents a proposal of an experimental method to measure these physical properties, applicable in experimental physics classes, in porous media samples consisting of spheres with the same diameter (monodisperse medium) and with different diameters (polydisperse medium). Soil samples are not used given the difficulty of working with this porous medium in laboratories dedicated to teaching basic experimental physics. The paper describes the method to be followed and results of two case studies, one in monodisperse medium and the other in polydisperse medium. The particle density results were very close to theoretical values for lead spheres, whose relative deviation (RD) was -2.9 % and +0.1 % RD for the iron spheres. The RD of porosity was also low: -3.6 % for lead spheres and -1.2 % for iron spheres, in the comparison of procedures – using particle and porous medium densities and saturated volumetric water content – and monodisperse and polydisperse media.