Reproducibility, interchangeability of measures, time to measure stabilization, and reference values of two tissue oximeters in healthy volunteers.

Abstract

This study aimed to compare two tissue oximeters, the INVOS 5100c and the Equanox 7600, in terms of their reproducibility and the interchangeability of their measures. In a randomized order, three measurements were taken at six different sites on both sides of the body in 53 healthy volunteers. Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and within-subject standard deviation (Sw) were calculated for each device. The ICCs were compared using Fisher r-to-z transformation and the Sw were compared using paired-sample t-tests. We found no difference between the reproducibility of the INVOS {ICC=0.92 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90 to 0.93]} and Equanox [ICC=0.90 (95% CI 0.88 to 0.93)] in terms of ICCs (p=0.06). However, the Equanox [Sw=1.96 (95% CI 1.91 to 2.02)] showed a better Sw than the INVOS [Sw=2.11 (95% CI 2.05 to 2.17)] (p=0.019). Also, when compared directly to stable condition, the readings produced by the two oximeters varied considerably [ICC 0.43 (95% CI 0.36 to 0.49)]. When taken individually, both tissue oximeters displayed good reproducibility, the Equanox being slightly better than the INVOS in terms of absolute reproducibility. However, when compared, the oximeters showed poor interdevices agreement. Reference values were also described.