Background: Non-invasive, real-time hemoglobin monitoring (SpHb) may reduce blood-draw costs and accelerate clinical decision-making. This study evaluated agreement between SpHb (Masimo
®) and laboratory hemoglobin (LabHb) in patients with and without dehydration. Methods/Approach: This single-center exploratory cross-sectional study included male veterans. SpHb
[...] Read more.
Background: Non-invasive, real-time hemoglobin monitoring (SpHb) may reduce blood-draw costs and accelerate clinical decision-making. This study evaluated agreement between SpHb (Masimo
®) and laboratory hemoglobin (LabHb) in patients with and without dehydration. Methods/Approach: This single-center exploratory cross-sectional study included male veterans. SpHb and LabHb were measured simultaneously. Demographic data, fasting status, and laboratory markers of dehydration were extracted from the electronic health record. Descriptive statistics, correlation analyses, and Bland–Altman analyses were performed. Results: Fifty-three male veterans were included. LabHb ranged from 9.20–17.00 g·dL
−1 and SpHb ranged from 9.90–15.90 g·dL
−1. Patients with dehydration had higher LabHb (M = 14.54, SD = 1.60) than those without dehydration (M = 13.01, SD = 1.68;
p < 0.001). SpHb and LabHb were strongly correlated in non-dehydrated patients (r = 0.82,
p < 0.001) but not in dehydrated patients (r = 0.23,
p = 0.275). Among non-dehydrated patients, limits of agreement were −1.67 to 2.18 g·dL
−1 (~69% within threshold). In dehydrated patients, limits widened to −1.97 to 5.27 g·dL
−1 (~25% within threshold), with 70.83% overestimating LabHb (>1 g·dL
−1). Conclusion: This exploratory study found a strong correlation and acceptable agreement between SpHb and LabHb in non-dehydrated patients, with substantially reduced agreement in dehydrated patients. Only approximately 25% of measurements in dehydrated patients met predefined agreement limits, indicating clinically meaningful variability. These findings suggest that hydration status may significantly affect SpHb performance. While SpHb may be useful in appropriately selected, hydrated populations, caution is warranted in dehydrated states. Larger, adequately powered studies are needed to further evaluate the impact of hydration and define the optimal patient populations and clinical applications.
Full article