| Literature DB >> 32518740 |
Varun Alwadhi1, Enisha Sarin2, Praveen Kumar1, Prasant Saboth2, Ajay Khera3, Sachin Gupta4, Harish Kumar2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Childhood pneumonia continues to be a major infectious killer in India. WHO recommended respiratory rate and oxygen saturation (SpO2) measurements are not well implemented in Indian public health outpatient facilities with the result that treatment decision-making rely on subjective assessments from variably trained and supervised healthcare providers. The introduction of a multi-modal pulse oximeter (POx) that gives reliable measurements would mitigate incorrect diagnosis. In light of future potential use of pulse oximeter in peripheral health centres, it becomes important to measure accuracy of respiratory rate and oxygen saturation of such an instrument. The current study measures accuracy of plethysmography based respiratory rate (RR) using a pulse oximeter (Masimo Rad-G) by comparing it with a gold standard (pediatrician) measurement. STUDYEntities:
Keywords: Child health; India; Pulse oximeter; Respiratory rate; Under-five pneumonia
Year: 2020 PMID: 32518740 PMCID: PMC7273681 DOI: 10.1186/s41479-020-00067-2
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Pneumonia (Nathan) ISSN: 2200-6133
Fig. 1Correlation between RR values obtained from both the measurements
Sensitivity and Specificity of RR of Pulse Oximeter
| Statistic | Value (%) | 95% CI |
|---|---|---|
| Sensitivity | 95.38 | 87.10 to 99.04 |
| Specificity | 93.75 | 79.19 to 99.23 |
| Accuracy | 94.85 | 88.38 to 98.31 |
| Kappa | 0.847 | 0.81 to 0.88 |
Characteristics of sampled children under study (N = 97)
| Variables | Mean | SD | Min | Max |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (months) | 15.31 | 12.3 | 2.5 | 54 |
| Gender (M/F) | 74/23 | |||
| SPO2 | 94.92 | 4.5 | 80 | 100 |
| RR oximeter | 48.41 | 13.3 | 22 | 86 |
| RR reference | 48.81 | 13.7 | 21 | 88 |
| Bias (Pulse Oximeter –True value@Reference) | −0.40 | 3.31 | −15 | 10 |
| Random Error (SD) | 13.3 | |||
| RMSD (root mean square deviation) | 3.31 | |||
| Pearson Correlation | 0.970** | 0.001 | ||
| Concordance correlation coefficient | 0.976** | 0.006 | 0.958 | 0.981 |
| 95% limits of agreement (for difference) | −0.40(mean) | 3.309 | 6.084 | −6.888 |
UCL upper confidence limit, LCL Lower confidence limit
Fig. 2Line of fit of RR values obtained from both the measurements
Fig. 3Bland and Altman Plot for difference in two measurements vs mean