↓ Skip to main content

Comparison of non-invasive peripheral venous saturations with venous blood co-oximetry

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, November 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
21 Mendeley
Title
Comparison of non-invasive peripheral venous saturations with venous blood co-oximetry
Published in
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing, November 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10877-016-9959-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

A. M. Belhaj, J. P. Phillips, P. A. Kyriacou, R. M. Langford

Abstract

The estimation of venous oxygen saturations using photoplethysmography (PPG) may be useful as a noninvasive continuous method of detecting changes in regional oxygen supply and demand (e.g. in the splanchnic circulation). The aim of this research was to compare PPG-derived peripheral venous oxygen saturations directly with venous saturation measured from co-oximetry blood samples, to assess the feasibility of non-invasive local venous oxygen saturation. This paper comprises two similar studies: one in healthy spontaneously-breathing volunteers and one in mechanically ventilated anaesthetised patients. In both studies, PPG-derived estimates of peripheral venous oxygen saturations (SxvO2) were compared with co-oximetry samples (ScovO2) of venous blood from the dorsum of the hand. The results were analysed and correlation between the PPG-derived results and co-oximetry was tested for. In the volunteer subjects,moderate correlation (r = 0.81) was seen between SxvO2 values and co-oximetry derived venous saturations (ScovO2), with a mean (±SD) difference of +5.65 ± 14.3% observed between the two methods. In the anaesthetised patients SxvO2 values were only 3.81% lower than SpO2 and tended to underestimate venous saturation (mean difference = -2.67 ± 5.89%) while correlating weakly with ScovO2 (r = 0.10). The results suggest that significant refinement of the technique is needed to sufficiently improve accuracy to produce clinically meaningful measurement of peripheral venous oxygen saturation. In anaesthetised patients the use of the technique may be severely limited by cutaneous arteriovenous shunting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 21 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 3 14%
Other 2 10%
Professor 2 10%
Student > Bachelor 2 10%
Researcher 2 10%
Other 7 33%
Unknown 3 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 7 33%
Engineering 6 29%
Computer Science 1 5%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 5%
Unknown 6 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 14 July 2018.
All research outputs
#15,395,259
of 22,903,988 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#409
of 679 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#249,255
of 414,929 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
#6
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,903,988 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 679 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.3. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 414,929 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.