Comparison of a New Forehead Reflectance Pulse Oximeter Sensor With a Conventional Digit Sensor in Pediatric Patients
Abstract
Background During conditions of poor perfusion, the accuracy of conventional extremity-based pulse oximeters may be limited. Limited evidence suggests that forehead perfusion may be better preserved during such periods, but pediatric experience with newer forehead reflectance sensors is limited. We prospectively compared the accuracy of a forehead reflectance sensor, the Max-Fast, with a new-generation digit sensor in pediatric patients. Methods Pediatric patients > 10 kg and who had arterial catheters were eligible for enrollment. Blood oxygen saturation was simultaneously measured with forehead and digit sensors, and compared to corresponding CO-oximetry-measured arterial oxygen saturation values (S(aO2)) taken at the same times. We used Bland-Altman analysis to calculate the bias and precision of the forehead sensor and the digit sensor relative to the S(aO2) values. Results We obtained 116 sample sets from 28 patients. The S(aO2) values ranged from 84.1% to 99.2%. The bias and precision of the forehead-to-S(aO2) difference were 0.6% and 2.7%, respectively, versus 1.4% and 2.6%, respectively, for the digit-to-S(aO2) difference (p Conclusions The Max-Fast sensor estimated S(aO2) as accurately as did a new-generation digit sensor in well-perfused pediatric patients.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
For infants who experience hypothermia or low body temperatures, distal measurement locations like the hand and foot often face limited perfusion to protect vital organs.
“In addition, for infants who experience hypothermia or low body temperatures, which is common for infants in the Ethiopian NICU, distal measurement locations like the hand and foot often face limited perfusion to protect vital organs8–11.”
From Soft, all-in-one, nanomembrane wearable system for advancing neonatal health monitoring in Ethiopia (2025) · cites this paper as [8]
No citation lists for this paper
No citation lists for this paper yet — checked again daily.
References 24 · Cited by 38
- Authors
- Berkenbosch, J. W., & Tobias, J. D.
- Affiliations
- University of Louisville (US)
- University of Missouri (US)
- Corresponding author
- Berkenbosch, John W
- Venue
- Respiratory Care
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2006-07
- Volume
- 51
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 726-731
- ISSN
- 0020-1324 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2117847536
- Cited by
- 38
- References
- 24
- Citations by year
- 2025: 3 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 5 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 2 · 2015: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 2.05
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Respiratory Care (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- PubMed
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Engineering › Biomedical Engineering › Non-Invasive Vital Sign Monitoring
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
- Physical Sciences › Chemical Engineering › Bioengineering › Analytical Chemistry and Sensors
- Keywords
- pulse oximetry accuracy, arterial oxygen saturation, pediatric patients, vasoactive drugs, arterial catheters
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Blood Gas Monitoring, Transcutaneous, Child, Child, Preschool, Electrodes, Extremities, Female, Forehead, Humans, Male, Prospective Studies, Regression Analysis
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review