A national online survey on the effectiveness of clinical alarms

American Journal of Critical Care

Volumn 17, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 36-41

  Korniewicz, Denise M ^a   Clark, Tobey ^b   David, Yadin ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

^c TEXAS CHILDREN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING; EQUIPMENT; HEALTH PERSONNEL ATTITUDE; HEARING; HOSPITAL EQUIPMENT; HOSPITAL PERSONNEL; HUMAN; INSTRUMENTATION; MONITORING; QUESTIONNAIRE; SAFETY; UNITED STATES;

ATTITUDE OF HEALTH PERSONNEL; AUDITORY PERCEPTION; BIOMEDICAL ENGINEERING; EQUIPMENT AND SUPPLIES, HOSPITAL; EQUIPMENT FAILURE; HUMANS; MONITORING, PHYSIOLOGIC; PERSONNEL, HOSPITAL; QUESTIONNAIRES; SAFETY MANAGEMENT; UNITED STATES;

EID: 41149091787     PISSN: 10623264     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Emergency Care Research Institute. Critical alarms and patient safety: ECRI's guide to developing effective alarm strategies and responding to JCAHO's alarm-safety goal. Health Devices. 2002;31(11):397-417.
2. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. 2004 national patient safety goals: FAQs. http://www.jointcommission.org/PatientSafety/NationalPatientSafetyGoals/2004_npsgs.htm. Accessed October 31, 2007.
3. Chambrin MC, Ravaux P, Calvelo-Aros D, Jaborska A, Chopin C, Boniface B. Multicentric study of monitoring alarms in the adult intensive care unit (ICU): a descriptive analysis. Intensive Care Med. 1999;25(12):1360-1366.
4. Mondor TA, Finley GA. The perceived urgency of auditory warning alarms used in the hospital operating room is inappropriate. Can J Anesth. 2003;50(3):221-228.
5. Simons D, Frederiks T, Tappel J. The evaluation of an auditory alarm for a new medical device. In: Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society 41st Annual Meeting. Santa Barbara, CA: Human Factors and Ergonomics Society; 1997:777-781.
6. Design survey Web browser. http://www.surveymonkey.com. Accessed October 31, 2007.
7. Valentin A, Capuzzo M, Guidet B, et al. Patient safety in intensive care: results from the multinational Sentinel Events Evaluation (SEE) study. Intensive Care Med. 2006;32(10):1591-1598.
8. Atzema C, Schull MJ, Borgundvaag B, Slaughter GR, Lee CK. ALARMED: adverse events in low-risk patients with chest pain receiving continuous electrocardiographic monitoring in the emergency department. A pilot study. Am J Emerg Med. 2006;24(1):62-67.
9. Davis LA. A phenomenological study of patient expectations concerning nursing care. Holist Nurs Pract. 2005; 19(3):126-133.
10. National Center for Workforce Analysis. Projected Supply, Demand and Shortages of Registered Nurses: 2002-2020. Bethesda, MD: US Dept of Health and Human Services; July 2002.
11. Meade CM, Bursell AL, Ketelsen L. Effects of nursing rounds: on patients' call light use, satisfaction, and safety. Am J Nurs. 2006;106(9):58-70.
12. Mehio-Sibai A, Feinleib M, Sibai TA, Armenian HK. A positive or negative confounding variable? A simple teaching aid for clinicians and students. Ann Epidemiol. 2005;15(6):421-423.
13. Christenfeld NJ, Sloan RP, Carroll D, Greenland S. Risk factors, confounding, and the illusion of statistical control. Psychosom Med. 2004;66(6):868-875.
14. Cassady CE, Starfield B, Hurtado MP, et al. Measuring consumer experiences with primary care. Pediatrics. 2000;105(4, pt 2):998-1003.
15. Campbell EG, Clarridge BR, Gokhale M, et al. Data with-holding in academic genetics: evidence from a national survey. JAMA. 2002;287(4):473-480.