Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Not Yet Recruiting

NCT Number: NCT06817850

Neonatal Oximeter Bias Study

The study aims to determine if there is a systematic difference (bias) between pulse oximeters used in control systems for automated oxygen delivery (A-FiO2) and those used in monitoring systems.

When using A-FiO2 systems there are commonly two oximeter probes on the infant with two difference readouts. Nurses report frustration that the two readings are often markedly different. It is understandable that physiological differences between sensor sites might reflect different regional oxygen saturation levels. It is also possible that there is a relevant systematic bias between difference monitors and sensors.

Therefore, a large systematic multicenter study is needed to determine whether these frequent differences should be ignored as physiological noise or considered clinically relevant.

Not Yet Recruiting

Trial opening soon.

Get Notified

Key information

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Motol University Hospital, Neonatal Unit

Prague, 15500, Czechia

Location contact

Jana Dornakova, MD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+420607720060

Jana Dornakova, MD

PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR

About this study

The accuracy of clinical pulse oximeters is specified as 3% RMS (root mean squared of the bias and variance) compared to arterial SaO2, in the range of 70-100% SpO2. This combines errors from bias and from scatter (imprecision). These validations are carried out under ideal laboratory conditions; that is, on healthy volunteers who undergo experimental desaturations, and not in the routine clinical environment. In a large multicenter clinical observation study, Ross et al in 2013 identified important related concerns. Specifically, they found that many of the clinical measurements were outside the 3% accuracy envelop. Specifically, they reported that bias varied depending on the level of saturation, the oximeter brand, sensor, race and site perfusion. Others have identified relevant differences in oximeters, oximeter sensors [Maiwald], and skin pigmentation.

Our study would be the first study in the neonatal ICU evaluating bias to consider different oximeters, sensors and sensor sites. It is highly topical in that changes in average SpO2 of 3% have been associated with excess neonatal mortality and morbidity.

This study is planned to investigate the source and magnitude of differences in SpO2 readings from oximeter sensors at different sensor sites that are routinely noticed by clinicians. While these differences are most often ignored and attributed to sensor site perfusion, if systematic they could have marked impact on mortality and morbidity.

The aim of the investigation is to provide practical guidance relating to SpO2 bias among oximeters, oximeter sensors and sensor location. While taking advantage of the clinical need for 2 oximeter sensors, the results will be applicable to all neonatal oximeter monitoring.

An observational design was selected to take place in centers using automated FiO2 control systems (A-FiO2) that routinely require the use of one sensor for control and another for monitoring. This is a refinement of the approach used in the often-cited multicenter evaluation of neonatal SpO2 exposure. Thus, without an investigational intervention the observational design is well suited to collect comparable data from multiple centers.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: No

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • Observations of any infant in the neonatal ICU with two simultaneous oximeter monitors may be included. The sites' Ethics Committee must review the protocol, approve participation and determine if Informed Consent is required. If required, it might be prospective, that is prior to collecting any data, or retrospective.

Exclusion criteria

  • Observations are to be made at the convenience of the Investigative team. They should reflect routine situation, and not be selected to specifically capture problems. Thus, the photo should be taken immediately with both displays are on in the view, and not delayed until something interesting happens. Observations should not be made if any of the following exclusion criteria are meet. If after collection, any of these are meet, the data should not be included as an Observation on the Observation-CRF.
  • One oximeter monitoring post ductal SpO2 in infant with clinically relevant shunt.
  • Monitor and A-FiO2 Oximeter not reading between 70-100%
  • Less than 5 minutes between repeat Observations
  • No more than 5 measurements per day per subject with sensors in same position and same oximeters (i.e., every time either sensor is moved, 5 new Observations can be made that day).
  • Presence of motion artifact
  • Presence of sensor integrity alarms/alerts

Treatment and study plan

Primary outcomes

  1. Bias between paired SpO2 measurements

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 in three ranges:

    • Hypoxemia (SpO2: 70 - <89.5%),
    • Normoxemia (SpO2: 89.5-95.5%)
    • Hyperoxemia (SpO2: >95.5-100%)

    The ranges are determined as the mean of the two oximeters.

Secondary outcomes

  1. Bias between paired SpO2 related to site

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: site (as factor).

  2. Bias between paired SpO2 related to sensor location

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: sensor location (as factor).

  3. Bias between paired SpO2 related to oximeter brand pairs

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: oximeter brand pairs (as factor).

  4. Bias between paired SpO2 related to sensor pairs

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: sensor pairs (as factor).

  5. Bias between paired SpO2 related to oximeter averaging setting

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: oximeter averaging setting (as factor).

  6. Bias between paired SpO2 related to skin shade

    Time frame: 1 month (250 observations is expected from each participating center; on average 2 patients and 5 observations per day per patient assumed)

    Bias between paired SpO2 (in %) in three ranges related to independent variable: skin shade (as factor).

Study contacts

Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.

Jakub Rafl, PhD

CONTACT

[email protected]

+420728229991

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Czech Technical University in Prague

Other

Collaborators

  • University Hospital, Motol

Registry information

Official study title

Evaluation of the Differences Between Simultaneous SpO2s Readings in the NICU: a Multicenter Observational Study

Acronym: NOB

Important dates

Study start
2025
Primary completion
2025
Study completion
2025
First posted
Feb 10, 2025
Registry last updated
Mar 25, 2025

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.