Basic HTML Version
alarm fatigue
f particular concern are the
myriad alarms associated with
almost every device we use to
monitor a patient’s condition.
Today’s technology never ceases to amaze.
It seems on an almost daily basis another
step is taken that seemed inconceivable just a few years prior. Even in the realm of
healthcare, which has probably and properly been slower to adopt the latest gizmo
and doodad, technology has brought a whole new level of precision, efficiency, and
safety to patient care. Our ability to capture, analyze, store, and share information has
never been greater and the technology that exists to test, treat, and monitor the ill and
injured is nothing short of remarkable. But as with everything there is a price and the
more technology enters the patient room, the more fears grow that the very tools that
help us care for those patients can also prove to be a distraction or even a danger.
that they might not have noticed on their
own—the sheer number of alarms, some-
times hundreds per patient, per day, can not
only be mentally distracting, but can also
make it impossible to hear some alarms, lead
to burnout responding to alarms, or cause
desensitization to alarms, a condition known
as “alarm fatigue.” Alarms may be turned
down or disabled or parameters reset in an
effort to buy some peace or allowmore focus
on the more critical alarms. And that’s when
disaster can strike.
In what it calls a “gross underestimation,”
the Joint Commission reported that in a 3½
Sounding
the Alarm
On…Well…
Alarms
O
By Karen Tatum
From cardiac monitors, to ventilators, to IV
pumps, to blood pressure or pulse oximetry
monitors, to bed alarms, every one of them
is capable of creating audible and some-
times visual alarms of varying intensity,
speed, and volume. In areas that care for
the critically ill, it can seem that alarms are
sounding constantly. While on the surface
this is a good thing—the alarms are notify-
ing providers that somethingmight be amiss