Quest 3-in-1 Pulse Oximeter

Very simple. It works well for me, despite my having Raynaud's syndrome... which frequently creates reading errors with finger pulse oximeters. I sometimes have to move it around to find a finger that's "working," but I always manage to find one, and it's never given me any trouble in its specs. A couple of nice features, like being able to reverse the direction of the display, and pulse strength. I've (so far) had no problems with it running out of "juice" or needing batteries replaced. I've had it maybe a month (?) and use it a couple times a day.

I purchased this quest oximeter and compared it to a facelake fl-100 oximeter (http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00HXXO332). I tested them both while simultaneously wearing a polar heart monitor watch (Polar FT-60). These were the results:While the polar watch and the quest oximeter were generally in agreement as far as heart rate, I noticed that the facelake oximeter "lagged behind" anywhere from 5 to 8 seconds in its readings. Let's call it a 7 second lag for conversations sake. 7 seconds may not sound like a lot, but as I noticed from the other two devices, my heart can change speed quite rapidly (for example when going from a sitting to a standing position). That 7 second delay in "catching up" essentially means that the facelake device is almost always showing the wrong heart rate by 10, 20, or 30 points whenever your heart rate is accelerating or decelerating. It will tend to be low when your true heart rate is going up, and high when your true heart rate is going down. It will only match your actual heart rate when your heart rate holds steady for a long while.For comparisons sake, the polar and quest devices did not seem to lag more than 2 seconds behind any heart rate changes.I noticed that other reviews mentioned that the oxygen percentage on the facelake device would generally be a little bit low, by 1 or 2 percent. I did find that the facelake device was consistently lower by this amount than the quest device. (The polar watch is not an oximeter, so there were only two readings for that value available during the test.) I also noticed that on the facelake device, my oxygen percentage would -never- display higher than 96 or 97%. (Which seemed odd.)The worst thing for me personally about the facelake was that its battery cover would easily fall off with only a very small bump or brush of the cover against the skin. The quest cover was more secure.The quest oximeter seemed to have an easier time "finding" my pulse under a variety of conditions. The facelake would sometimes struggle if my pulse was over 120 or so (during exercise). Below this rate, and while holding still, the facelake had no problems finding a pulse. (The polar device, relying on a chest strap, also had no trouble finding my pulse. The polar device was designed for intense exercise and is reliable under those conditions.)On the plus side, the facelake has a bright, easy-to-read display, with a pulse graph shown in all orientations, even the "vertical" orientation. The Quest device also has a good display, with two available orientations.The facelake has great customizable settings. For example you can set high and low values for audible alarms for pulse rate and oxygen level, or disable the alarms completely if desired. The quest oximeter has similar features, but it is less customizable in its settings. The quest device relies on "reasonable defaults" for such things as audible alarms. (50 and 120 bpm,, and the quest alarms cannot be disabled)The quest device costs a little bit more than the facelake.All in all, I found the quest device to be a better purchase, even if it costs $20 more.I liked that the quest device will turn on instantly when you insert a finger, and turn off as soon as you remove the finger.I considered giving the quest device four stars, because it might be nice to have the ability to customize or silence the audible alarms. However, there are other oximeters on the market that do not offer audible alarms all. If there were half stars, I would give the quest device a 4.5.

My personal trainer advised me to get a heart-rate monitor to do high-intensity interval training based on heart rates, not time. He recommended a Polar model, and I had almost decided on the Polar FT-4, but was put off by the fact that it requires a chest strap. While I see the point for accuracy's sake, in my circumstances it would be a bit of a pain to manage. So I looked for something that didn't require a strap. Of which there are many models, especially wristwatch style, and while I imagine they would be reasonably accurate, I did not find one that was a continuous-display model. They all require you to touch the bezel with both forefinger and thumb for up to 10 seconds to get a rate displayed. Um, no thanks.So I got the Quest. My only even slightly-adverse comment is that it is somewhat larger than I thought it would be, but not by much so that's really just a nit to pick. It does display both heart rate and oxygen saturation continuously and even shows a waveform of the pulse across the bottom of the display. There is also a vertical meter that shows how strong a pulse signal the unit is getting. The white button you see in the picture flips the display vertically so you can see it whether you extend your fingers away from you or fold them toward you.The unit seems very accurate. I wore it while my daughter took my pulse manually with a watch and her fingers on my wrist and the unit's count and hers +/- only two, so for my purposes that it close enough.It shuts off automatically when you remove it and starts when you put it on. I am pleased so far.

Works well. Does what it promises. It would be great if this has blue tooth functionality to work with Digifit or Tecio or Fitbit app for iphone then I will give 5 stars. Or even some memory and wi-fi capability or USB port for download historical data

I have recently had major heart problems. I need to monitor my BP often. My doctor's staff take my blood oxygen levels as both a diagnostic and a guide to my body's response to exertion. I didn't want to wait until my visits with the doctor to see how I am doing. I would prefer to know in real time. This inexpensive device supplements my BP monitor with very valuable information I should know. It is simple to use, seems to be accurate, and monitors my pulse rate and intensity, as well. The pulse graphic is informative as well to display arrhythmia. It is readable from either the user's self view or the care giver's view at the push of a button.In a compact, lightweight device with carry bag and detachable lanyard, it is well designed for everyday usage. Uses two AA batteries which should seldom need replacement (it turns itself off when not in service) easy and cheap to maintain. If it retains its reliability, I would strongly recommend this device.

This item came on a daily super buy from Amazon. It came to me quickly and initially I was very pleased. As I continued to check my oxygen level - I came to realize that if I switched fingers I got a different reading. I suppose that it is possible that the vascular make up of my hands could allow for this to happen -except I checked with my physician and my oxygen levels on their oximeter was pretty constant no matter what finger I used. My pulse rate is measured pretty accurately. So maybe I just got a defective unit. Perhaps you will have better luck.