4.6 Review

Misconceptions in Reporting Oxygen Saturation

期刊

ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA
卷 105, 期 -, 页码 S5-S9

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1213/01.ane.0000278741.29274.e1

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND: We describe some misconceptions that have become common practice in reporting blood gas and cooximetry results. In 1980, oxygen saturation was incorrectly redefined in a report of a new instrument for analysis of hemoglobin (Hb) derivatives. Oxygen saturation (sO(2)) was redefined as the ratio of oxyhemoglobin (O(2)Hb) to total Hb instead of the ratio of O(2)Hb to active Hb (O(2)Hb + desoxyhemoglobin). In addition, the new terms functional saturation and fractional saturation were introduced. Since the new parameter was implemented in a widely used cooximeter, its use is now widespread and has caused misunderstandings. METHODS: In this report, we review the development of the definitions and measurements of sO(2) and related quantities and contend that the misconceptions should be resolved by standardizing instrument read-outs and clinical reports, so that sO(2), defined as the ratio of O(2)Hb to active Hb, should replace FO(2)Hb and be reported along with the total Hb concentration and the common dyshemoglobin fractions (% CO-Hb and % methemoglobin [metHb]). RESULTS: The redefinition of sO(2) as the % O(2)Hb or FO(2)Hb did not address the confusion that might result from interchanging these two often-similar but different terms. The term fractional saturation is an inappropriate terminology and lacks clear physiological meaning. We see frequent cases of confusion: (a) the difference between the sO(2) in pulse oximetry and the FO(2)Hb in cooximetry is called the pulse oximeter gap; (b) sO(2)results are described as method dependent; and (c) reference ranges for these terms are substituted. CONCLUSIONS: Although either parameter could be used by clinicians who fully understand the relatively simple difference between these parameters, we find clear evidence that there is widespread confusion of these terms, even among experts in the field. Standardization of the reporting format would help, and instrument manufacturers could contribute by standardizing the reporting format for cooximetry results.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据