Suppr超能文献

运动、环境光和灌注不足对脉搏血氧仪功能的影响。

Effects of motion, ambient light, and hypoperfusion on pulse oximeter function.

作者信息

Trivedi N S, Ghouri A F, Shah N K, Lai E, Barker S J

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology, University of California at Irvine, Orange 92668, USA.

出版信息

J Clin Anesth. 1997 May;9(3):179-83. doi: 10.1016/s0952-8180(97)00039-1.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To compare the performance of five pulse oximeters during hypoperfusion, probe motion, and exposure to ambient light interference.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

Laboratory facility at a university medical center.

PATIENTS

8 unanesthetized, ASA physical status I volunteers.

INTERVENTIONS

We evaluated five common pulse oximeters with respect to three scenarios: (1) an operating room light was shone on oximeter probes, (2) a motion generator was used to generate 2 Hz and 4 Hz hand motion, and (3) a pneumatic compression device overlying the brachial artery was used to simulate hypoperfusion. Electrocardiographic (ECG) and arterial blood gas values were considered gold standards for heart rate (HR) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) respectively. SpO2 nondisplay and values greater than 4% from simultaneous arterial SaO2-oximeter values were defined as errors. Nondisplay of HR, or HR greater than 5% from ECG values, were also considered errors.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The Ohmeda and Nellcor N200 with finger probe had the highest total failure rates with respect to both SpO2 and HR due to ambient light interference (p < 0.05). The Nellcor N200 with finger probe and N200 with C lock were the most accurate with regard to SpO2 during 2 Hz and 4 Hz motion (p < 0.05). However, all oximeters failed dramatically during 4 Hz motion when measuring HR. In the hypoperfusion model, the Nellcor N200 with finger probe and the Nellcor C Lock oximeters performed significantly better than all others in terms of both HR and SpO2 (P < 0.05), while the Criticare oximeter failed 100% of the time.

CONCLUSION

There are significant differences in the accuracy of commercially available pulse oximeters during nonideal circumstances, with failure rates varying from approximately 5% to 50% depending on the oximeter and source of interference. Furthermore, no single oximeter performed the best under all conditions.

摘要

研究目的

比较五款脉搏血氧仪在低灌注、探头移动及受到环境光干扰情况下的性能表现。

设计

前瞻性研究。

地点

一所大学医学中心的实验室设施。

患者

8名未麻醉的、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)身体状况分级为I级的志愿者。

干预措施

我们针对三种情况评估了五款常用脉搏血氧仪:(1)将手术室灯光照射在血氧仪探头上;(2)使用运动发生器产生2Hz和4Hz的手部运动;(3)使用覆盖肱动脉的气动压迫装置模拟低灌注。心电图(ECG)和动脉血气值分别被视为心率(HR)和血氧饱和度(SpO2)的金标准。SpO2无显示以及与同时测得的动脉血氧饱和度(SaO2)-血氧仪值相差超过4%的值被定义为误差。HR无显示,或HR与ECG值相差超过5%,也被视为误差。

测量结果及主要发现

由于环境光干扰,配备手指探头的Ohmeda和Nellcor N200在SpO2和HR方面的总故障率最高(p < 0.05)。配备手指探头的Nellcor N200和配备C锁的N200在2Hz和4Hz运动期间SpO2方面最为准确(p < 0.05)。然而,在测量HR时,所有血氧仪在4Hz运动期间均出现显著故障。在低灌注模型中,配备手指探头的Nellcor N200和Nellcor C Lock血氧仪在HR和SpO2方面的表现均显著优于其他所有型号(P < 0.05),而Criticare血氧仪在所有测试中均出现故障。

结论

在非理想情况下,市售脉搏血氧仪的准确性存在显著差异,故障率根据血氧仪和干扰源的不同在约5%至50%之间变化。此外,没有一款血氧仪在所有条件下都表现最佳。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验