MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313463544 · doi:10.4187/respcare.10582

Accuracy of Multiple Pulse Oximeters in Stable Critically Ill Patients

2023· article· en· W4313463544 on OpenAlexaffabout
Marie‐Anne Blanchet, Gabriel M. Mercier, Antoine Delobel, Emi Nayet, Pierre-Alexandre Bouchard, Serge Simard, Erwan L’Her, Richard D. Branson, François Lellouche

Bibliographic record

VenueRespiratory Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRespiratory Support and Mechanisms
Canadian institutionsInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoxemiaArterial catheterCritically illPulse oximetryArterial bloodOxygenationOxygen saturationSupplemental oxygenProspective cohort studyAnesthesiaCatheterSurgeryInternal medicineOxygen

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: An accurate S pO 2 value is critical in order to optimally titrate oxygen delivery to patients and to follow oxygenation guidelines. Limited prospective data exist on real-world performance of pulse oximeters in critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to assess accuracy and bias of the S pO 2 values measured by several oximeters in hospitalized subjects. METHODS: We included stable adults in the ICU with an arterial catheter in place. Main exclusion criteria were poor S pO 2 signal and S pO 2 > 96%. In each subject, we simultaneously evaluated 4 oximeters: Nonin (Plymouth, Minnesota) embedded in the FreeO 2 device (OxyNov, Québec City, Québec, Canada), Masimo (Radical-7, Masimo, Irvine, California), Philips (FAST, Philips, Amsterdam, the Netherlands), and Nellcor (N-600, Medtronic, Minneapolis, Minnesota). Arterial blood gases were drawn and simultaneously each oximeters' S pO 2 values were collected. S pO 2 values were compared to the reference (arterial oxygen saturation [S aO 2 ] value) to determine bias and accuracy. The ability for oximeters to detect hypoxemia and the impact of oximeters on oxygen titration were evaluated. RESULTS: We included 193 subjects (153 male, mean age 66 y) in whom 211 sets of measurements were performed. The skin pigmentation evaluated by Fitzpatrick scale showed 96.2% of subjects were light skin (types 1 and 2). One oximeter overestimated S aO 2 (Philips, +0.9%), whereas the 3 others underestimated S aO 2 (Nonin −3.1%, Nellcor −0.3%, Masimo −0.2%). S aO 2 was underestimated with Nonin oximeter in 91.3% of the cases, whereas it was overestimated in 55.2% of the cases with Philips oximeter. Moderate hypoxemia (S aO 2 86–90% or P aO 2 55–60 mm Hg) was detected in 92, 33, 42, and 11% of the cases with Nonin, Nellcor, Masimo, and Philips, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: We found significant bias and moderate accuracy between the tested oximeters and the arterial blood gases in the studied population. These discrepancies may have important clinical impact on the detection of hypoxemia and management of oxygen therapy.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.689

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.030
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.270 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations36
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRespiratory CareSame topicRespiratory Support and MechanismsFrench-language works237,207