Families' perceptions of consumer-grade, inexpensive oxygen saturation monitors.

Abstract

Objectives: We evaluated what proportion of families have a consumer-grade pulse oximeter, why they bought one, and how they choose to use it.

Working hypothesis: We hypothesized that children followed in cardiorespiratory clinics would be more likely to have an oximeter than children attending a more general clinic.

Study design and subject selection: We carried out a cross-sectional study using a convenience sample of children attending a respirology, cardiology, or gastroenterology clinic at a children's hospital. Consenting guardians completed a survey.

Results: Two-hundred families completed the survey. Fifty-three (26.5%; 53/200) had an oximeter at home. The proportion of children attending a cardiorespiratory clinic who had an oximeter was higher than another clinic (p = 0.08), but 15.5% of children attending the latter also had access to one. Of devices not funded by government insurance, over 80% of devices were "fingertip" clamp-style oximeters, and 50% were purchased online. Most devices were used only when the child was ill (83.7%; 36/43). Only about 1/3 of families had received education about using an oximeter, and a similar proportion had compared their oximeter to a medical-grade device. Only 2.4% (1/42) respondents did not feel that their device was "somewhat" or "very" accurate. The oxygen saturation that would prompt seeking emergency care was similar to most pediatric acute care guidelines.

Conclusions: Many children, particularly those with cardiorespiratory conditions, have access to consumer-grade pulse oximeters. Asking about the presence of an oximeter should be part of the pediatric history, and families responding affirmatively should be offered education.