NHS Provides Pulse Oximeters

neilmcl

In an article to today on the BBC News it was reported that the NHS are giving free pulse oximeters to at risk patients to monitor their oxygen levels at home, and suggested that everyone would do well to buy one of these "£20 gadgets".

Has anyone here been given one of these and if so what was the make/model of the ones you got?

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

MattMattMattUK

I purchased one from Amazon in 2013 for £19.25 as a family member had an ongoing issue with dropping O2 sat. and so this was a piece of mind check at the time, the pulse part is spot on, both vs my FitBit, the separate sensor on my phone and a manual check. I do not have an ongoing comparative measurement of the SpO2 but I have twice had the opportunity to test it against a NHS pulse oximeter (in a hospital and in a GP) and on both occasions it was spot on.

neilmcl said:

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

There is no reason to think that they will be inaccurate, the science is well known, the technology fairly basic, it is perfectly reasonable to build and sell a device which has <1% accuracy for £20.

Mickey666

neilmcl said:

In an article to today on the BBC News it was reported that the NHS are giving free pulse oximeters to at risk patients to monitor their oxygen levels at home, and suggested that everyone would do well to buy one of these "£20 gadgets".

Has anyone here been given one of these and if so what was the make/model of the ones you got?

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

Given that the article talks about normal blood oxygen levels being 95-100% and hospital admittances due to covid-related problems being in the region of 70-85%, I doubt that an accuracy of +/-2% is particularly important.  Indeed, if it keeps the cost low enough that more people buy them then it might even be a good thing.

Besides, absolute accuracy is not necessarily important when trying to monitor a CHANGE in something.  In such cases, consistency is probably more important.  Thus, the manufacturer may state that ALL of their devices will be accurate to +/-2% but each individual device is likely to have a fixed an consistent accuracy, eg +0.5% or +1.6% or -0.75% or any other number between +/- 2.

In other words, a manufacturer-stated accuracy of +/-2% does not necessarily that an individual unit will FLUCTUATE between +/- 2% accuracy.

Sea_Shell

That'll be them sold out on Amazon now!! 😉

neilmcl

Mickey666 said:

neilmcl said:

In an article to today on the BBC News it was reported that the NHS are giving free pulse oximeters to at risk patients to monitor their oxygen levels at home, and suggested that everyone would do well to buy one of these "£20 gadgets".

Has anyone here been given one of these and if so what was the make/model of the ones you got?

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

Given that the article talks about normal blood oxygen levels being 95-100% and hospital admittances due to covid-related problems being in the region of 70-85%, I doubt that an accuracy of +/-2% is particularly important.  Indeed, if it keeps the cost low enough that more people buy them then it might even be a good thing.

Besides, absolute accuracy is not necessarily important when trying to monitor a CHANGE in something.  In such cases, consistency is probably more important.  Thus, the manufacturer may state that ALL of their devices will be accurate to +/-2% but each individual device is likely to have a fixed an consistent accuracy, eg +0.5% or +1.6% or -0.75% or any other number between +/- 2.

In other words, a manufacturer-stated accuracy of +/-2% does not necessarily that an individual unit will FLUCTUATE between +/- 2% accuracy.

If you read the article or watched it on the news they said that anyone with readings of 93% or 94% should be contacting their GP or NHS 111 and less then this they should be ringing 999 or going straight to A&E. Anyone waiting until they had an oxygen level of less than 85% is in serious difficulty and unlikely to survive going forward.

Morrigan_2020

neilmcl said:

Mickey666 said:

neilmcl said:

In an article to today on the BBC News it was reported that the NHS are giving free pulse oximeters to at risk patients to monitor their oxygen levels at home, and suggested that everyone would do well to buy one of these "£20 gadgets".

Has anyone here been given one of these and if so what was the make/model of the ones you got?

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

Given that the article talks about normal blood oxygen levels being 95-100% and hospital admittances due to covid-related problems being in the region of 70-85%, I doubt that an accuracy of +/-2% is particularly important.  Indeed, if it keeps the cost low enough that more people buy them then it might even be a good thing.

Besides, absolute accuracy is not necessarily important when trying to monitor a CHANGE in something.  In such cases, consistency is probably more important.  Thus, the manufacturer may state that ALL of their devices will be accurate to +/-2% but each individual device is likely to have a fixed an consistent accuracy, eg +0.5% or +1.6% or -0.75% or any other number between +/- 2.

In other words, a manufacturer-stated accuracy of +/-2% does not necessarily that an individual unit will FLUCTUATE between +/- 2% accuracy.

If you read the article or watched it on the news they said that anyone with readings of 93% or 94% should be contacting their GP or NHS 111 and less then this they should be ringing 999 or going straight to A&E. Anyone waiting until they had an oxygen level of less than 85% is in serious difficulty and unlikely to survive going forward.

I hope they also mentioned that nail polish, dirty fingernails, cold hands or poor circulation can affect the readout! 

Grumpy_chap

What exactly is anyone meant to do with the information from instant pulse-ox?
Accuracy of the instrument is not that important but repeatability is, in my view. 
It allows you to establish what is normal for you.  So, if your resting O2 is 96-98% and then your resting O2 is lower, say 92-94%, that is a change.  Would you do something just on that, or only if your O2 is lower and you have some other symptoms?  In many cases, not.
The value of having a normal for you O2 level is, if you do get some kind of illness, you can then also assess that the O2 measured is not normal for you, and that aids diagnosis by a medical professional.

fred246

I remember someone telling me there were funny rules in the NHS because the service was supposed to be free. So a GP could say "come to the surgery and have your blood pressure checked everyday by the practice nurse" but they couldn't say "buy yourself a £50 blood pressure checking machine" even though £50 might be nothing to the patient and much preferable to going to the surgery every day. So they could give out free oximeters but not tell people to buy their own. It was a while ago. Things may have changed.
If you read the article https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-55733527 it gives you advice on how to interpret the readings.

Mickey666

neilmcl said:

Mickey666 said:

neilmcl said:

In an article to today on the BBC News it was reported that the NHS are giving free pulse oximeters to at risk patients to monitor their oxygen levels at home, and suggested that everyone would do well to buy one of these "£20 gadgets".

Has anyone here been given one of these and if so what was the make/model of the ones you got?

I purchased one myself a while back from Amazon and I'd be a bit concerned if a lot of people were being these cheap ones and then starting to rock up to A&E or ring NHS 111 when the levels drop below 95% because let's face it the £20 ones are not exactly that accurate and will fluctuate between +- 2% of the real figure.

Given that the article talks about normal blood oxygen levels being 95-100% and hospital admittances due to covid-related problems being in the region of 70-85%, I doubt that an accuracy of +/-2% is particularly important.  Indeed, if it keeps the cost low enough that more people buy them then it might even be a good thing.

Besides, absolute accuracy is not necessarily important when trying to monitor a CHANGE in something.  In such cases, consistency is probably more important.  Thus, the manufacturer may state that ALL of their devices will be accurate to +/-2% but each individual device is likely to have a fixed an consistent accuracy, eg +0.5% or +1.6% or -0.75% or any other number between +/- 2.

In other words, a manufacturer-stated accuracy of +/-2% does not necessarily that an individual unit will FLUCTUATE between +/- 2% accuracy.

If you read the article or watched it on the news they said that anyone with readings of 93% or 94% should be contacting their GP or NHS 111 and less then this they should be ringing 999 or going straight to A&E. Anyone waiting until they had an oxygen level of less than 85% is in serious difficulty and unlikely to survive going forward.

I didn't see the news report, but my basic point stands; +/-2% is perfectly adequate for this level of monitoring.

Niv

The problem with all these sorts of gadgets is people think that if they give a reading then its working properly. Never considering getting it calibrated at all. In many cases I suspect this is a thing that will get chucked on the side, not kept clean and not used as per instruction, then people will get surprised/annoyed when it gives inaccurate results of stops working...

Mickey666

No one gets a £20 anything calibrated, especially if absolute accuracy isn't important.  Last time I checked my blood pressure monitor against my doctor's model it was still accurate after nearly 20 years.