Abstract
A new mode of continuous O2 surveillance (pulse oximetry) is rapidly gaining popularity over traditional transcutaneous PO2 monitoring in this country. Both techniques continuously and transcutaneously monitor oxygenation status - one monitors 02 saturation while the other O2 tension: we compared the two techniques (TcSO2 by Nellcor pulse oximeter and TcPO2 by the Litton oxymonitor) in terms of (1) preparation time, (2) response to changes in physiological conditions and, (3) continuity of monitoring in 26 patients .Results: (1) TcSO2 monitor took an average time of 25.8±8.1 sec but TcPO2 monitor required 10.3±2.3 minutes of preparation and calibration time. (2) Initial response time to physical disturbances ( heel prick or ET suction) was slower in TcPO2 compared with TcSO2 (1.07±0.82 min vs 0.69±.50 min, p<0.01). Skin hypoperfusion encountered in shock made both techniques inoperative. (3) Only TcPO2 monitoring required interruption (site change every 2 hours) to avoid skin burn. No interruption was needed in TcSO2 monitoring. Total interruptions averaged 123 min per 24 hours per patient. Monitoring areas for TcSO2 are restricted to hands, feet, fingers and toes. Movement of extremities disrupted TcSO2 reading. This is not a problem for TcPO2 monitoring. NICU nursing & medical staff uniformly preferred the pulse oximetry because of its advantages demonstrated in this study, specifically ease of application, absence of skin burns, quicker response times, and fewer interruptions of monitoring.
Article PDF
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Wei, T., Tien, H., Baldomero, A. et al. TRANSCUTANEOUS O2 SATURATION VS O2 TENSION MONITORING. Pediatr Res 21 (Suppl 4), 208 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1203/00006450-198704010-00250
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1203/00006450-198704010-00250