Assessment of the accuracy of commercial pulse oximeters V1
Research type
Research Study
Full title
Assessment of the accuracy of commercial pulse oximeters
IRAS ID
127615
Contact name
Susannah Fleming
Contact email
Sponsor organisation
University of Oxford
Research summary
Pulse oximeters are medical devices capable of measuring heart rate and oxygen levels in the blood by shining light through the finger. They are used widely by a variety of health professionals, including general practitioners. A wide variety of makes and models of pulse oximeter are available, ranging in price from around £20 to over £1000. There is very little information available on the accuracy of these devices, particularly at the cheaper end of the market, and some evidence that not all devices are capable of picking up clinically important drops in oxygen levels. We wish to test the accuracy of a variety of commercially available pulse oximeters on human volunteers with a range of clinically relevant oxygen levels.
We intend to recruit patents attending a respiratory outpatients clinic as well as healthy volunteers, to make sure that we can measure a range of different oxygen levels. We will recruit a total of 75 participants, of whom 20 will have normal oxygen levels. It is likely that these 20 will be healthy volunteers. All of the participants will be studied at the respiratory outpatients clinic at the Churchill Hospital in Oxford.
Participants will have their blood oxygen levels measured using four different pulse oximeters (three test oximeters and a known good quality oximeter) while a video camera records the displays from the pulse oximeters for later analysis. They will also have their pulse measured by a nurse. We will do this twice, so that we can test six different test oximeters. If the participant would normally be having a blood sample taken to test their oxygen levels, we will also ask for permission to use this information.
The study is funded by the Royal College of General Practitioners.REC name
East Midlands - Leicester Central Research Ethics Committee
REC reference
14/EM/1098
Date of REC Opinion
25 Jul 2014
REC opinion
Favourable Opinion