Technological Distractions (Part 2)

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

Alarm fatigue is a widely recognized safety and quality problem where exposure to high rates of clinical alarms results in desensitization leading to dismissal of or slowed response to alarms. Nonactionable alarms are thought to be especially problematic. Despite these concerns, the number of clinical alarm signals has been increasing as an everincreasing number of medical technologies are added to the clinical care environment.

Related collections

Most cited references 55

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Monitor alarm fatigue: an integrative review.

Maria Cvach (2016)

Alarm fatigue is a national problem and the number one medical device technology hazard in 2012. The problem of alarm desensitization is multifaceted and related to a high false alarm rate, poor positive predictive value, lack of alarm standardization, and the number of alarming medical devices in hospitals today. This integrative review synthesizes research and non-research findings published between 1/1/2000 and 10/1/2011 using The Johns Hopkins Nursing Evidence-Based Practice model. Seventy-two articles were included. Research evidence was organized into five main themes: excessive alarms and effects on staff; nurse's response to alarms; alarm sounds and audibility; technology to reduce false alarms; and alarm notification systems. Non-research evidence was divided into two main themes: strategies to reduce alarm desensitization, and alarm priority and notification systems. Evidence-based practice recommendations and gaps in research are summarized.

0 comments Cited 133 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Monitor alarm fatigue: standardizing use of physiological monitors and decreasing nuisance alarms.

Douglas K. Graham, Maria Cvach (2009)

Reliance on physiological monitors to continuously "watch" patients and to alert the nurse when a serious rhythm problem occurs is standard practice on monitored units. Alarms are intended to alert clinicians to deviations from a predetermined "normal" status. However, alarm fatigue may occur when the sheer number of monitor alarms overwhelms clinicians, possibly leading to alarms being disabled, silenced, or ignored. Excessive numbers of monitor alarms and fear that nurses have become desensitized to these alarms was the impetus for a unit-based quality improvement project. Small tests of change to improve alarm management were conducted on a medical progressive care unit. The types and frequency of monitor alarms in the unit were assessed. Nurses were trained to individualize patients' alarm parameter limits and levels. Monitor software was modified to promote audibility of critical alarms. Critical monitor alarms were reduced 43% from baseline data. The reduction of alarms could be attributed to adjustment of monitor alarm defaults, careful assessment and customization of monitor alarm parameter limits and levels, and implementation of an interdisciplinary monitor policy. Although alarms are important and sometimes life-saving, they can compromise patients' safety if ignored. This unit-based quality improvement initiative was beneficial as a starting point for revamping alarm management throughout the institution.

0 comments Cited 96 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: found

Is Open Access

Insights into the Problem of Alarm Fatigue with Physiologic Monitor Devices: A Comprehensive Observational Study of Consecutive Intensive Care Unit Patients

Barbara Drew, Patricia Harris, Jessica Zègre-Hemsey … (2014)

Purpose Physiologic monitors are plagued with alarms that create a cacophony of sounds and visual alerts causing “alarm fatigue” which creates an unsafe patient environment because a life-threatening event may be missed in this milieu of sensory overload. Using a state-of-the-art technology acquisition infrastructure, all monitor data including 7 ECG leads, all pressure, SpO2, and respiration waveforms as well as user settings and alarms were stored on 461 adults treated in intensive care units. Using a well-defined alarm annotation protocol, nurse scientists with 95% inter-rater reliability annotated 12,671 arrhythmia alarms. Results A total of 2,558,760 unique alarms occurred in the 31-day study period: arrhythmia, 1,154,201; parameter, 612,927; technical, 791,632. There were 381,560 audible alarms for an audible alarm burden of 187/bed/day. 88.8% of the 12,671 annotated arrhythmia alarms were false positives. Conditions causing excessive alarms included inappropriate alarm settings, persistent atrial fibrillation, and non-actionable events such as PVC's and brief spikes in ST segments. Low amplitude QRS complexes in some, but not all available ECG leads caused undercounting and false arrhythmia alarms. Wide QRS complexes due to bundle branch block or ventricular pacemaker rhythm caused false alarms. 93% of the 168 true ventricular tachycardia alarms were not sustained long enough to warrant treatment. Discussion The excessive number of physiologic monitor alarms is a complex interplay of inappropriate user settings, patient conditions, and algorithm deficiencies. Device solutions should focus on use of all available ECG leads to identify non-artifact leads and leads with adequate QRS amplitude. Devices should provide prompts to aide in more appropriate tailoring of alarm settings to individual patients. Atrial fibrillation alarms should be limited to new onset and termination of the arrhythmia and delays for ST-segment and other parameter alarms should be configurable. Because computer devices are more reliable than humans, an opportunity exists to improve physiologic monitoring and reduce alarm fatigue.

0 comments Cited 93 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

All references

Author and article information

Journal

Title: Critical Care Medicine

Abbreviated Title: Critical Care Medicine

Publisher: Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)

ISSN (Print): 0090-3493

Publication date Created: 2018

Publication date (Print): January 2018

Volume: 46

Issue: 1

Pages: 130-137

Article

DOI: 10.1097/CCM.0000000000002803

PubMed ID: 29112077

SO-VID: 958ee8cb-f804-4812-93ab-ced3b5f296e5

History

Data availability:

Comments

Comment on this article

scite_

Smart Citations

Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting

View Citations

See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.