Search Results

The pulse oximeter is indicated for continuous or spot check monitoring of functional arterial oxygen saturation (SpO2) and pulse rate of adult patients in hospitals and clinics.

The HS10A is a handheld, battery powered pulse oximeter used for monitoring of pulse rate and functional arterial oxygen saturation in arterial blood. The HS10A include the addition of audible alarms, addition of keys and display icons in the user interface board to access the alarm settings. The device also has menu features to allow the user to set the time, date and measurement alarm limits.

Here's a breakdown of the acceptance criteria and study information for the Pulse Oximeter, based on the provided text:

1. Table of Acceptance Criteria and Reported Device Performance

Note: The document directly states the SpO2 accuracy criterion and result. For other specifications like pulse rate, the acceptance criteria are not explicitly detailed for the subject device but are implicitly met through overall equivalence claims and conformance to standards. The predicate also has a SpO2 accuracy of "$70-100% no less than ±2%(No motion)$," which serves as the basis for the acceptance criteria for the new device.

2. Sample Size Used for the Test Set and Data Provenance

• Sample Size for Test Set: 12 healthy adult male and female volunteers.
• Number of Blood Samples: 300 blood samples.
• Data Provenance: The study was conducted on "healthy adult male and female volunteers with light to dark skin pigmentations." The country of origin is not explicitly stated, but the company is based in China. The study appears to be prospective as it's described as "clinical testing" specifically for this device.

3. Number of Experts Used to Establish Ground Truth for the Test Set and Qualifications

The document does not mention the use of experts to establish ground truth for the test set. Instead, the ground truth for SpO2 was established using a laboratory CO-Oximeter.

4. Adjudication Method for the Test Set

Not applicable. The ground truth was established by instrumental measurement (CO-Oximeter), not human adjudication.

5. If a Multi-Reader Multi-Case (MRMC) Comparative Effectiveness Study was done

No, an MRMC comparative effectiveness study was not done. The study focused on the standalone performance of the device against a laboratory reference.

6. If a Standalone (i.e., algorithm only without human-in-the-loop performance) was done

Yes, a standalone study was done. The "clinical testing" described measures the intrinsic accuracy of the pulse oximeter (HS10A) itself against a reference standard.

7. The Type of Ground Truth Used

The ground truth used for the SpO2 accuracy evaluation was an instrumental reference standard, specifically a laboratory CO-Oximeter. This is compared to "outcomes data" in the sense that the CO-Oximeter provides definitive physiological measurements.

8. The Sample Size for the Training Set

The document does not provide any information about a training set. This suggests that the device's underlying algorithms or calibration were developed prior to this validation study, and details about their training are not part of this 510(k) summary. Pulse oximeters typically rely on established physiological models and calibration rather than machine learning training sets in the way AI algorithms do.

9. How the Ground Truth for the Training Set Was Established

Not applicable, as no training set information is provided.

Ask a specific question about this device