AJCC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

American Journal of Critical Care. 2007;16: 146-152
Copyright © 2007 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow A correction has been published
Right arrow Respond to This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fernandez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Weaver, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fernandez, M.
Right arrow Articles by Weaver, C.

Evaluation of a New Pulse Oximeter Sensor

By Marco Fernandez, RN, MSN, Kathy Burns, RN, BSN, MNEd, CCRN, Beverly Calhoun, RN, BSN, Saramma George, RN, BA, Beverly Martin, RN, BSN and Chris Weaver, RN, BSN. From Saint Thomas Health System, Nashville, Tenn.

Corresponding author: Marco Fernandez, RN, MSN, Saint Thomas Health Services, 4220 Harding Rd, Nashville, TN 37202 (e-mail: mfernand{at}stthomas.org).

• Background A new forehead noninvasive oxygen saturation sensor may improve signal quality in patients with low cardiac index.

• Objectives To examine agreement between oxygen saturation values obtained by using digit-based and forehead pulse oximeters with arterial oxygen saturation in patients with low cardiac index.

• Methods A method-comparison study was used to examine the agreement between 2 different pulse oximeters and arterial oxygen saturation in patients with low cardiac index. Readings were obtained from a finger and a forehead sensor and by analysis of a blood sample. Bias, precision, and root mean square differences were calculated for the digit and forehead sensors. Differences in bias and precision between the 2 noninvasive devices were evaluated with a t test (level of significance P<.05).

• Results Nineteen patients with low cardiac index (calculated as cardiac output in liters per minute divided by body surface area in square meters; mean 1.98, SD 0.34) were studied for a total of 54 sampling periods. Mean (SD) oxygen saturations were 97% (2.4) for blood samples, 96% (3.2) for the finger sensor, and 97% (2.8) for the forehead sensor. By Bland Altman analysis, bias ± precision was –1.16 ± 1.62% for the digit sensor and –0.36 ± 1.74% for the forehead sensor; root mean square differences were 1.93% and 1.70%, respectively. Bias and precision differed significantly between the 2 devices; the forehead sensor differed less from the blood sample.

• Conclusions In patients with low cardiac index, the forehead sensor was better than the digit sensor for pulse oximetry.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Am J Crit CareHome page
J. M. Haynes, M. Fernandez, K. Burns, B. Calhoun, S. George, B. Martin, and C. Weaver
Exclusion of Patients Limits Findings in Pulse Oximeter Study
Am. J. Crit. Care., May 1, 2007; 16(3): 206 - 257.
[Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2007 by the American Association of Critical-Care Nurses.