ArticleJournal of Korean medical science2026
Preference, Awareness, and Use of Sphygmomanometers in the Mercury-Free Era: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Physicians in Korea.
Article in Journal of Korean medical science, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Highlights of the 2026 Korean Society of Hypertension guidelines for the management of hypertension: what's new and what has changed.Clinical hypertension · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn response to global mercury reduction initiated by the Minamata Convention, the use of mercury sphygmomanometers (MSs) as mercury-containing medical devices is being phased out from clinical practice. However, little is currently known about Korean physicians' preferences and their awareness of alternative blood pressure (BP) devices post-ban.
methodsAn online survey using a convenience sample was conducted with 1,728 physicians (98.9% response rate) from the following five specialties: cardiology (9.3%), internal medicine excluding cardiology (27.5%), family medicine (16.1%), general practice (21.6%), and other specialties (34.5%). The survey included 31 items assessing preferences, awareness of alternative BP devices, and compliance with standardized BP measurement protocols (Korean Society of Hypertension Guidelines). BP devices were categorized as either mercury-based (MS) or mercury-free (aneroid, hybrid, and automated devices).
resultsFollowing the mercury ban, preferences for BP devices shifted as follows: MS (28.2%→12.8%), aneroid (13%→17.4%), hybrid (12.6%→14.5%), and automated devices (46.2%→55.3%). Even after the ban, 12.8% of physicians continued to use MS. Only 50.3% had above-average awareness of mercury-free devices. Compliance with BP measurement standards was high for cuff placement (84.8%), pulse rate measurement (81%), and 5 minutes of rest (80.3%) whereas lower compliance was noted for duplicate BP measurements (59.5%), both-arm measurements (59.5%), and positional BP measurements (52.6%).
conclusionDespite regulatory restrictions, a notable proportion of physicians continue to use MS, and awareness of mercury-free BP devices remains suboptimal. Comprehensive education is needed to enhance BP measurement practices and replace mercury-based devices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.