The accuracy of pulse oximetry in measuring oxygen saturation by levels of skin pigmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Chunhu Shi, Mark Goodall, Jo Dumville, James Hill, Gill Norman, Oliver Hamer, Andrew Clegg, Caroline Leigh Watkins, George Georgiou, Alexander Hodkinson, Catherine Elizabeth Lightbody, Paul Dark, Nicky Cullum

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review


Background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, there have been concerns regarding potential bias in pulse oximetry measurements for people with high levels of skin pigmentation. We systematically reviewed the effects of skin pigmentation on the accuracy of oxygen saturation measurement by pulse oximetry (SpO2) compared with the gold standard SaO2 measured by CO-oximetry. Methods: We searched Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Embase, EBSCO CINAHL,, and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (up to December 2021) for studies with SpO2–SaO2 comparisons and measuring the impact of skin pigmentation or ethnicity on pulse oximetry accuracy. We performed meta-analyses for mean bias (the primary outcome in this review) and its standard deviations (SDs) across studies included for each subgroup of skin pigmentation and ethnicity and used these pooled mean biases and SDs to calculate accuracy root-mean-square (Arms) and 95% limits of agreement. The review was registered with the Open Science Framework ( Results: We included 32 studies (6505 participants): 15 measured skin pigmentation and 22 referred to ethnicity. Compared with standard SaO2 measurement, pulse oximetry probably overestimates oxygen saturation in people with the high level of skin pigmentation (pooled mean bias 1.11%; 95% confidence interval 0.29 to 1.93%) and people described as Black/African American (1.52%; 0.95 to 2.09%) (moderate- and low-certainty evidence). The bias of pulse oximetry measurements for people with other levels of skin pigmentation or those from other ethnic groups is either more uncertain or suggests no overestimation. Whilst the extent of mean bias is small or negligible for all subgroups evaluated, the associated imprecision is unacceptably large (pooled SDs > 1%). When the extent of measurement bias and precision is considered jointly, pulse oximetry measurements for all the subgroups appear acceptably accurate (with Arms < 4%). Conclusions: Pulse oximetry may overestimate oxygen saturation in people with high levels of skin pigmentation and people whose ethnicity is reported as Black/African American, compared with SaO2. The extent of overestimation may be small in hospital settings but unknown in community settings. Review protocol registration:
Original languageEnglish
Article number267
Pages (from-to)267
JournalBMC Medicine
Issue number1
Publication statusPublished - 16 Aug 2022


  • pulse oximetry
  • oxygen saturation
  • skin pigmentation
  • meta-analysis
  • covid 19
  • Ethnicity
  • Skin pigmentation
  • Arterial blood oxygen saturation
  • Systematic review
  • Pulse oximetry
  • Measurement bias
  • Oxygen
  • Pandemics
  • Humans
  • Oximetry/methods
  • COVID-19
  • Skin Pigmentation
  • Oxygen Saturation

Research Beacons, Institutes and Platforms

  • Manchester Cancer Research Centre


Dive into the research topics of 'The accuracy of pulse oximetry in measuring oxygen saturation by levels of skin pigmentation: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this