2003 Abstracts
SaO2 DEPENDANCY OF NEONATAL PULSE OXIMETRY ACCURACY: A ROOT MEAN SQUARE ERROR ANALYSIS
Dale Gerstmann MD, Ryan Berg RRT, Ron Haskell RRT, Cathy Brower RRT, Brenda Smith
RN. Neonatology, Utah Valley Regional Medical Center, Provo, Utah.
Objective: To apply a root mean square error analysis to pulse oximeter derived SpO
2 compared to arterial SaO
2 values obtained from neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients who require arterial access.
Design: 740 paired SpO
2 and SaO
2 values from 42 NICU patients were utilized in the analysis. Data were collected on 3 neonatal pulse oximeters. The root mean square statistic, A
rms = [(1/n) S
i S
j ([SpO
2-SaO
2]
ij)
2]
1/2, was calculated across patients (i) and samples (j), then separated into 3 components: "within subject" variation (VAR
WS), "between subject" variation (VAR
BS) , and a "bias squared" (BIAS
SQ) term. A
rms, VAR
WS, VAR
BS, and BIAS
SQ were analyzed in relationship to: a) patient accrual, and b) arterial saturation values.
Results: Based on patient accrual, values of A
rms, VAR
WS, and VAR
BS stabilized by 20-25 patients, whereas the BIAS
SQ term stabilized somewhat sooner, by 15-20 patients. VAR
WS seemed consistent between devices, but VAR
BS was less so. Overall, device A
rms was biased by the uneven distribution of samples across SaO
2. All devices demonstrated a similar relationship betwen A
rms and SaO
2, which reached minimum values over a narrow range of SaO
2 (94-97%). Above and below this range A
rms increased 2 fold at 99% SaO
2 and 3-6 fold at 82% SaO
2. The largest contributor to the increase in A
rms outside the minimum range was BIAS
SQ, the device measurement error. This component of A
rms variation is not accounted for by VAR
WS or VAR
BS, and is characterized by the slope of the difference function, [SpO
2-SaO
2] vs SaO
2.
Conclusion: The variance of neonatal pulse oximetry readings is dependent on the SaO
2 at which the reading is taken. It is a function of the variability of taking readings on a single patient, taking readings between multiple patients, and the degree of equipment accuracy. The 95% confidence interval for readings at minimum A
rms (SaO
2≈95%) is approximately ±4 sat %, and for SpO
2 at 85%, the 95% confidence interval is approximately ±10 sat %.