placeUnited States
Contact Us
Medtronic / Covidien Products / Nellcor™ Pulse Oximetry Performance

Which pulse oximetry technology performs better?

Nellcor™
pulse oximetry

What’s the fundamental tech difference?

Nellcor™ technology starts with the heart, using the pulse as the foundation. By prioritizing the pulsatile signal and locking onto the pulse, it allows tracking of moment-to-moment changes.

Masimo SET™*
pulse oximetry

What's the fundamental tech difference?

Masimo SET™* technology prioritizes the product LED signal. By assuming that both the arterial and venous blood move, it uses an algorithm to separate the arterial signal from noise.

What does that ultimately mean
for your patients?

Find out below.

Speed to post†

Seconds count in patient care decisions. Don’t lose them waiting for an accurate vital signs reading.1

Nellcor™ pulse oximetry has
been shown to post on average

12

seconds faster than Masimo
SET™* technology.2

Accuracy†

Inaccurate pulse rate readings may guide clinicians to inappropriate or unnecessary interventions.3

Nellcor™ pulse oximetry showed no clinically significant difference from ECG reference.3,4

Nellcor™ OxiMax™ pulse oximetry
Heart rate
compared to ECG2
(correlation coefficient)		 r=0.984
STRONGLY correlated
Mismatch ≥ 40 bpm
compared to ECG2
(% of patients)		 0%
False bradycardia2
(% of patients)		 0%
Masimo Radical-7™* pulse oximetry
Heart rate
compared to ECG2
(correlation coefficient)		 r=0.235
WEAKLY correlated
Mismatch ≥ 40 bpm
compared to ECG2
(% of patients)		 31%
False bradycardia2
(% of patients)		 35%

Motion†

Motion can cause irregular venous blood flow that can affect accurate monitoring.3

Nellcor™ pulse oximetry sensors are

60%

more accurate than Masimo SET™*
sensors at detecting pulse rates in
adults during motion.5,6

Low perfusion†

Low perfusion can limit peripheral readings and may make patients difficult to assess.3,4

Nellcor™ pulse oximetry missed

74%

less hypoxemic episodes
than Masimo technology.7

Seen enough?

Get in touch

Workflow and alarms

Sensor performance and alarm management issues can distract you from patient care.

Nellcor™ OxySoft™ sensors 
maintain

85%

adhesiveness after 18 repositions 
compared to Masimo LNCS Neo™*
sensors which lose 50% of
adhesiveness after only two repositions.8,9

Nellcor™ OxySoft™ sensors don’t stick
to themselves and stay adhered

2x

better than Masimo LNCS Neo™* sensors.9

85–99%

of alarms don’t require clinical
intervention.10,11

Nellcor™ SatSeconds alarm
management may
reduce nuisance alarms
by up to

40%.12,13

Skin integrity

Although monitoring may be unavoidable, attaching a sensor may pose a risk to the fragile skin of neonates and the elderly.

Nellcor™ OxySoft™ sensors are the first
with a gentle, silicone adhesive that 
removes

75%

less skin cells than Masimo LNCS
Neo™* sensors — so you can remove
without pulling fragile skin.14,15

Get in touch.

Nellcor™ pulse oximetry helps solve the performance and workflow issues that can distract you from patient care and what matters most to you. Get in touch with your Medtronic representative to learn more about our full portfolio of products — helping to give you the quick, reliable information you need to make the right calls for your patients.

Learn more about Nellcor™ pulse oximetry

Never miss a beat with Nellcor™ technology.

We start with the heart.

Learn more
Nellcor™ OxySoft™ SpO2 sensors

The first pulse oximetry sensor to use a silicone adhesive.

Learn more
Clinical education

We’re committed to helping you broaden your clinical expertise.

Learn more

TM* Third–party brands are trademarks of their respective owners. All other brands are trademarks of a Medtronic company.

† Oxygen saturation accuracy can be affected by certain environmental, equipment, and patient physiologic conditions (as discussed in the operator’s manual for the monitor) that influence readings of SpO2. Please consult the instructions for use and manual for full safety information.

‡ Study objective: To prospectively measure the contributions of skin pigmentation, perfusion index (PI), sex, and age on pulse oximeter errors. Study design: Prospective, 146 healthy subject hypoxia laboratory study comparing accuracy of two pulse oximeter brands (Nellcor™ N–595 and Masimo Radical–7).

  1. Wyckoff MH, Aziz K, Escobedo MB, et al. Part 13: neonatal resuscitation: 2015 American Heart Association guidelines update for cardiopulmonary resuscitation and emergency cardiovascular care. Circulation. 2015;132(suppl 2):S543–S560.
  2. Khoury R, Klinger G, Shir Y, Osovsky M, Bromiker R. Monitoring oxygen saturation and heart rate during neonatal transition. comparison between two different pulse oximeters and electrocardiography. J Perinatol. 2021;41(4):885–890. doi: 10.1038/s41372–020–00881–y. Epub 2020 Nov 30. PMID: 33250516. Study objective: Compare efficacy and reliability of two pulse–oximeters (POx) (Masimo Radical–7 and Nellcor™ Oximax Bedside). Study design: Prospective observational monocentric comparative clinical study. 60 newborns included in total. Funding and conflict of interest: Authors declare no conflict of interest, Nellcor™ and Masimo provided sensors free of charge.
  3. Rabi Y, Dawson JA. Oxygen therapy and oximetry in the delivery room. Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2013;18(6):330–5. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2013.08.007. Epub 2013 Sep 10. PMID: 24035476.
  4. Dawson JA, Kamlin CO, Vento M, et al. Defining the reference range for oxygen saturation for infants after birth. Pediatrics. 2010;125(6):e1340–e1347. doi:10.1542/peds.2009-1510.
  5. Addison PS, Mannheimer PD, Ochs J. White paper:  Pulse rate performance of two pulse oximeters during challenging monitoring conditions. 2013 
  6. Batchelder K, Sethi R, Eng B, Pinto YJ. White paper:  Pulse rate performance of two pulse oximeters in the NICU. 2015.
  7. Gudelunas MK, Lipnick M, Hendrickson C, et al. Low perfusion and missed diagnosis of hypoxemia by pulse oximetry in darkly pigmented skin: a prospective study. Anesth Analg. Published online December 19, 2023. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006755. 
  8. Based on internal report RE00357465, RevA – Marketing Validation Report from a blinded hands-on evaluation conducted with 12 clinicians (RNs, RTs). April 2021.
  9. CSR 2022 03 15 v.1.0 – cyberDERM S21–15 cyberDERM post-market gentleness comparison of pulse oximeter sensors on adults with fragile skin. 38 paired Masimo LNCS and OxySoft peel tests after 2 and 18 reapplications respectively across 19 adult subjects distributed across 2 forearm sites per sensor type. Sites were prepared by removing hair via surgical clippers and swabbing with alcohol.
  10. Ver Hage A. Alarm fatigue can endanger patients. OR Today. May 1, 2015. Accessed August 23, 2019.
  11. The Joint Commission. Medical device alarm safety in hospitals. Sentinel Event Alert. 2013; (50):1-3.
  12. Brostowicz, Heather & Rais-Bahrami, K.. (2010). Oxygen saturation monitoring in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU): Evaluation of a new alarm management. J; Neonatal Perinatal Med.. 3. 201-205. 10.3233/NPM-2010-0116.
  13. Stefanescu BM, O’Shea TM, Haury F, Carlo WA, Slaughter JC. Improved filtering of pulse oximeter monitoring alarms in the neonatal ICU: bedside significance. Respir Care. 2016;61(1):85–89. doi: 10.4187/respcare.04177. Epub 2015 Oct 27. PMID: 26508772. 
  14. Based on internal report MDT20006OXYVMT, Rev 4, SpO2 Accuracy Validation of OxySoft during motion and nonmotion. April 2021.
  15. Based on internal report RE00357465, revA, Marketing validation report from a blinded hands-on evaluation conducted with 12 clinicians (RNs, RTs). April 2021