Skip to main content

Comparison of Two New Generation Pulse Oximeters with Arterial Oxygen Saturation in Critically Ill Children

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the performance of two new generation pulse oximeters, one with enhanced signal extraction technology (SET) and other without enhanced SET in detecting hypoxemia and to correlate it with arterial blood gas analysis.

Methods

Forty-eight patients, admitted to pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a teritiary care teaching hospital in India for critical care and support during the study period, who had an arterial catheter in situ were included. Children with those disease conditions known to interfere with pulse oximetry and blood gas analysis were excluded.184 set of observations were made during the study period. Each set had oxygen saturation (SpO2) measured from both the pulse oximeters and the corresponding arterial oxygen saturation (SaO2). The values were compared for occurrence of true and false alarms during periods of normal BP, hypotension and varying degrees of hypoxia.

Results

The mean arterial SaO2 in the study was 94.4 % ± 4.9. The mean SpO2 recorded in conventional and enhanced signal extraction technology (SET) pulse oximeters were 94.9 % ± 4.5 and 97.2 % ± 4.7 respectively. Enhanced signal extraction technology pulse oximeter detected 4/27 (15 %) of true hypoxemic events and 1 event was a false alarm. Conventional pulse oximeter detected 11/27 (41 %) true hypoxemic events but recorded 6 false alarms.

Conclusions

Both pulse oximeters were not found to be performing satisfactorily in picking up hypoxemia in the study. There was good correlation with mean SpO2 from pulse oximeters and arterial SaO2. The reliability of pulse oximetry decreases with worsening hypoxemia and hypotension, and the sensitivity for picking up hypoxemia can be as low as 15 %.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

References

  1. Huch A, Huch R, König V, Neuman MR, Parker D, Yount J, et al. Limitations of pulse oximetry. Lancet. 1988;1:357–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Gehring H, Hornberger C, Matz H, Konecny E, Schmucker P. The effects of motion artifact and low perfusion on the performance of a new generation of pulse oximeters in volunteers undergoing hypoxemia. Respir Care. 2002;47:48–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Fluck Jr RR, Schroeder C, Frani G, Kropf B, Engbretson B. Does ambient light affect the accuracy of pulse oximetry? Respir Care. 2003;48:677–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Jubran A. Pulse oximetry. In: Tobin MJ, ed. Principles and Practice of Intensive Care Monitoring. New York: McGraw Hill; 1998. pp. 261–87.

  5. Goldman JM, Petterson MT, Kopotic RJ, Barker SJ. Masimo signal extraction pulse oximetry. J Clin Monit Comput. 2000;16:475–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Rheineck-Leyssius AT, Kalkman CJ. Influence of pulse oximeter lower alarm limit on the incidence of hypoxaemia in the recovery room. Br J Anaesth. 1997;79:460–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Barker SJ, Tremper KK, Hyatt J. Effects of methemoglobinemia on pulse oximetry and mixed venous oximetry. Anesthesiology. 1989;70:112–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Buckley RG, Aks SE, Eshom JL, Rydman R, Schaider J, Shayne P. The pulse oximetry gap in carbon monoxide intoxication. Ann Emerg Med. 1994;24:252–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Report of the Second Task Force on Blood Pressure Control in Children--1987. Task Force on Blood Pressure Control in Children. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Bethesda, Maryland. Pediatrics. 1987;79:1–25.

  10. Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet. 1986;1:307–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Malviya S, Reynolds PI, Voepel-Lewis T, Siewert M, Watson D, Tait AR, et al. False alarms and sensitivity of conventional pulse oximetry versus the Masimo SET technology in the pediatric postanesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg. 2000;90:1336–40.

    CAS  PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Brouillette RT, Lavergne J, Leimanis A, Nixon GM, Ladan S, McGregor CD. Differences in pulse oximetry technology can affect detection of sleep-disorderd breathing in children. Anesth Analg. 2002;94:S47–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. BOOST II United Kingdom Collaborative Group, BOOST II Australia Collaborative Group, BOOST II New Zealand Collaborative Group, Stenson BJ, Tarnow-Mordi WO, Darlow BA, Simes J, Juszczak E, et al. Oxygen saturation and outcomes in preterm infants. N Engl J Med. 2013;368:2094–104.

    PubMed  Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Contributions

BJ, RL, SKK: Conceived, designed and analyzed the study; BJ: Collected the data. RL will act as guarantor for this paper.

Conflict of Interest

None.

Role of Funding Source

None.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rakesh Lodha.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jose, B., Lodha, R. & Kabra, S.K. Comparison of Two New Generation Pulse Oximeters with Arterial Oxygen Saturation in Critically Ill Children. Indian J Pediatr 81, 1297–1301 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-014-1381-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12098-014-1381-z

Keywords

  • Pulse oximetry
  • Children
  • Hypoxemia
  • Arterial blood gas analysis
  • Agreement