Anaesthesia
-
Review Comparative Study
Potential errors in pulse oximetry. I. Pulse oximeter evaluation.
There is no absolute reference for oxygen saturation, although multiwavelength in vitro oximeters are accepted as the 'gold standard'. Regardless of whether fractional or functional saturation is used by manufacturers to calibrate their oximeters, evaluation against fractional saturation is recommended since this is the clinically relevant variable. The use of standard notation and comparisons based on bias and precision is recommended. ⋯ The empirical algorithms used to convert the signal to its 'readout value' and the quality control of hardware may both be important sources of variability between oximeters. Change in blood temperature may introduce errors in pulse oximeter and in vitro oximeter saturation readings, but these will be clinically insignificant. Changes in blood pH should not decrease pulse oximetry accuracy.
-
Review Comparative Study
Potential errors in pulse oximetry. II. Effects of changes in saturation and signal quality.
The published studies of pulse oximeter performance under conditions of normal, high and low saturation, exercise, poor signal quality and cardiac arrhythmia are reviewed. Most pulse oximeters have an absolute mean error of less than 2% at normal saturation and perfusion; two-thirds have a standard deviation (SD) of less than 2%, and the remainder an SD of less than 3%. Some pulse oximeters tend to read 100% with fractional saturations of 97-98%. ⋯ Ear oximetry may be inaccurate during exercise. Low signal quality can result in failure to present a saturation reading, but data given with low signal quality warning messages are generally no less accurate than those without. Cardiac arrhythmias do not decrease accuracy of pulse oximeters so long as saturation readings are steady.