Motol University Hospital, Neonatal Unit
Prague, 15500, Czechia
Location contact
Jana Dornakova, MD
CONTACT
Jana Dornakova, MD
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
NCT Number: NCT06817850
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.
Trial opening soon.
Get NotifiedAll sexes
Observational
Prague, 15500, Czechia
Jana Dornakova, MD
CONTACT
Jana Dornakova, MD
PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
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.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
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:
The ranges are determined as the mean of the two oximeters.
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
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).
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
Czech Technical University in Prague
Other
Evaluation of the Differences Between Simultaneous SpO2s Readings in the NICU: a Multicenter Observational Study
Acronym: NOB
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.
NCT07513051
Lung Diseases, Neonatal Respiratory Distress
Créteil, France
View Trial DetailsNCT06207994
Lung Diseases, Neonatal Respiratory Distress
Prague, Czechia
View Trial DetailsNCT06572033
Lung Diseases, Neonatal Respiratory Distress
Dallas, Texas, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT06356909
Lung Diseases, Neonatal Respiratory Distress
Créteil, France
View Trial Details