Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Background Continuous pulse oximetry (Sp o 2 ) is a commonly utilized tool to obtain an indirect, noninvasive measurement of hemoglobin oxygen saturation. Difficulty obtaining measurement with Sp o 2 sensors can lead nurses to try off-label sites until they find placement that provides a signal. Currently, there is limited evidence to support this application. Purpose The purpose of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of off-label placement of pulse oximetry sensors in comparison to on-label placement in adult cardiac intensive care patients. Methods Data were collected on 24 participants. At the time of a medically necessary arterial blood gas laboratory draws, 4 Sp o 2 measurements were gathered from an on-label finger sensor, an off-label finger sensor, an on-label ear sensor, and an off-label ear sensor. Results were analyzed using 4 Pearson correlation coefficients, Bland-Altman plots, and 2 linear mixed-effect models. Results Our study found that while both our on-label finger and off-label finger pulse oximetry sensor overestimated when compared to the arterial hemoglobin saturation (gold standard), there was greater overestimation found with the off-label placement. Though there was not a significant difference observed between the ear probe on the nose and the gold standard, figures examining off-label ear probe and gold standard measures show that, in lower ranges of oxygen saturation, the off-site probe substantially overestimates true oxygen saturation, while in higher ranges of oxygen saturation, the off-site ear probe underestimates true oxygen saturation. Conclusions No changes should be made to the current practice of using pulse oximetry sensor placement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hlavin et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: