To send content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about sending content to .
To send content items to your Kindle, first ensure email@example.com
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about sending to your Kindle.
Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Infants with single ventricle physiology have arterial oxygen saturations between 75 and 85%. Home monitoring with daily pulse oximetry is associated with improved interstage survival. They are typically sent home with expensive, bulky, hospital-grade pulse oximeters. This study evaluates the accuracy of both the currently used Masimo LNCS and a relatively inexpensive, portable, and equipped with Bluetooth technology study device, by comparing with the gold standard co-oximeter.
Prospective, observational study.
Single institution, paediatric cardiac critical care unit, and neonatal ICU.
Twenty-four infants under 12 months of age with baseline oxygen saturation less than 90% due to cyanotic CHD.
Measurements and Results:
Pulse oximetry with WristOx2 3150 with infant sensors 8008 J (study device) and Masimo LCNS saturation sensor connected to a Philips monitor (hospital device) were measured simultaneously and compared to arterial oxy-haemoglobin saturation measured by co-oximetry. Statistical analysis evaluated the performances of each and compared to co-oximetry with Schuirmann’s TOST equivalence tests, with equivalence defined as an absolute difference of 5% saturation or less. Neither the study nor the hospital device met the predefined standard for equivalence when compared with co-oximetry. The study device reading was on average 4.0% higher than the co-oximeter, failing to show statistical equivalence (p = 0.16). The hospital device was 7.4% higher than the co-oximeter and also did not meet the predefined standard for equivalence (p = 0.97).
Both devices tended to overestimate oxygen saturation in this patient population when compared to the gold standard, co-oximetry. The study device is at least as accurate as the hospital device and offers the advantage of being more portable with Bluetooth technology that allows reliable, efficient data transmission. Currently FDA-approved, smaller portable pulse oximeters can be considered for use in home monitoring programmes.
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.