| 
			
			 And that creates a problem: the nearly constant din tends to 
			desensitize hospital staff to the sounds, a phenomenon dubbed "alarm 
			fatigue," which can result in real emergencies being missed, 
			researchers warn in The American Journal of Emergency Medicine. 
 Patients who are not critically ill need to be monitored, but "that 
			doesn't mean every little thing needs to be alarmed," said the 
			study's lead author, Dr. William Fleischman, director of quality and 
			implementation science at Hackensack Meridian Health in New Jersey. 
			"For example, if there's an extra heart beat the alarm will put out 
			a beep, but that may be a finding that is clinically meaningless."
 
			
			 
			In the U.S., "we think the more monitoring there is, the better off 
			the patient will be," Fleischman said. "But the more alarms go off, 
			the more the staff gets desensitized to the sound."
 Usually that doesn't result in ill effects for the patient, but 
			Fleischman recently had the experience of walking by a patient whose 
			alarm was sounding with no one responding. That patient turned out 
			to have an oxygen saturation - the amount of oxygen in the blood - 
			of 50%, a life-threatening situation. He alerted staff and the 
			patient "was put on a breathing machine."
 
 "That kind of thing happens across the country every day," 
			Fleischman said.
 
 To get a better idea of how often alarms signal real patient 
			distress, Fleischman and his colleagues set up an experiment. One of 
			the physician researchers spent several days in the emergency room 
			observing patient characteristics, types of alarms that were 
			beeping, staff responses to the beeping, whether the alarm was in 
			response to something real and whether the alarm resulted in any 
			change in the way the patient was managed.
 
 During a total of 53 hours, 1049 alarms went off, associated with 
			146 patients. Alarms changed the clinical management of a patient 
			just eight times, or 0.8% of the time. ER staff did not respond to 
			63% of the alarms.
 
			
            [to top of second column] | 
            
			 
			One solution might be to make the alarms less sensitive, Fleischman 
			said. Often, monitors are left with the factory default settings, he 
			explained. 
			That makes sense to Maria Cvach, director of policy management and 
			integration at the Johns Hopkins Health System. At Hopkins, "nurses 
			are allowed to customize monitors based on baseline measurements - 
			otherwise they would be ringing all the time," Cvach said. "For 
			example, heart rate monitors are usually set at to beep if the rate 
			goes under 50 or over 120. If the patient comes in and (has a heart 
			rhythm issue) with a rate of 130, you might customize the monitor 
			for that patient."
 Unfortunately, Cvach said, "a lot of hospitals won't let you do 
			that. We let the nurses at bedside who know what the baseline is, 
			set up a customized range that can go 10 percent above and below the 
			baseline."
 
 The study underscores the downside of overly sensitive alarms, said 
			Dr. Erick Eiting, an associate professor of emergency medicine at 
			the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York City and 
			vice chair of operations for emergency medicine at Mount Sinai 
			Downtown.
 
 "I think we all experience something called alarm fatigue," Eiting 
			said. "We set up so many bells and whistles to go off in different 
			scenarios that staff can hear something and immediately reach for 
			the silence button without thinking about why it's going off and 
			what might need to be changed clinically. And in many cases, there 
			isn't anything that needs to be changed, and that makes people even 
			more likely to ignore the alarms."
 
			
			 
			
 SOURCE: http://bit.ly/33qgKqh American Journal of Emergency 
			Medicine, online July 30,2019.
 
			[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights 
				reserved.] Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, 
			broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.  
			Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |