Effect of Altered Alarm Settings on Patient Adverse Events and Alarm Signal Frequency
1 other identifier
interventional
22
1 country
1
Brief Summary
Alarm fatigue, a lack of response to an alarm due to desensitization, is a national problem. The problem of alarm desensitization is multifaceted and is related to a high false alarm rate, poor positive predictive value, lack of alarm standardization and the large number of medical devices with built in alarms in use today. Cardiac monitor alarms are intended to notify the healthcare practitioner that a clinical crisis is imminent. However, hundreds of physiologic monitor alarms occur on monitored units each day. As a result, practitioners are highly vulnerable to alarm fatigue which has resulted in serious harm to patients and death due to staff inattention from alarm signal desensitization. Research indicates that 80-99.4% of monitor alarms are false or clinically insignificant. Alarm hazards is the number one medical device technology hazard of 2012 and has been listed by ECRI (Emergency Care Research Institute) among the top 3 medical device hazards for the past three years (ECRI, 2011). Delivering actionable alarm information to care providers is challenging given the significant number of false alarms. Ideally, alarms should activate for events in greatest need of clinical attention without increasing the risk of adverse patient outcomes. This is not the case with current monitoring technology which is designed for high sensitivity and low specificity. Practitioners must use clinical intuition for determining how conservatively alarms should be set to be most useful. There is no research evidence to support how best to set alarms without affecting patient outcomes. Quality improvement studies performed at The Johns Hopkins Hospital have demonstrated that the frequency of alarm signals can be reduced by more than 50% through an altered set of alarm parameters. This reduction in alarm signals has lead to an increase awareness of alarms that do occur as well as create a quieter, healing environment for patients. Although this change was not associated with a "noticeable" increase in adverse patient events, this important outcome was not rigorously studied. The specific aims of this pilot study is to determine if decreasing the number of alarms by using an altered set of alarm parameters has an effect on patient outcomes in an intensive care unit. This project may have a significant impact on patient safety. A decrease in noise at the bedside may result in less distraction to caregivers and may have a positive effect on patient recovery. It is expected that the altered set of monitor default parameters will result in a decrease in audible alarms without increasing clinically significant adverse patient events.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at below P25 for not_applicable
Started Apr 2013
Typical duration for not_applicable
1 active site
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
April 1, 2013
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
May 1, 2013
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
January 17, 2014
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 22, 2014
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
April 1, 2016
CompletedMarch 6, 2017
March 1, 2017
1 month
January 17, 2014
March 2, 2017
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (1)
Clinically significant adverse events
A variety of clinically significant events were assessed while subjects were on the protocol
1 day
Secondary Outcomes (2)
Alarm Signals
1 day
Alarm-triggered interventions
1 day
Study Arms (2)
Control
NO INTERVENTIONControl arm with organizational-based alarm parameter settings
Altered Alarm Settings
EXPERIMENTALAltered set of alarm parameter settings.
Interventions
Eligibility Criteria
Contact the study team to confirm eligibility.
Sponsors & Collaborators
Study Sites (1)
Johns Hopkins Hospital
Baltimore, Maryland, 21287, United States
Related Publications (6)
Cvach M. Monitor alarm fatigue: an integrative review. Biomed Instrum Technol. 2012 Jul-Aug;46(4):268-77. doi: 10.2345/0899-8205-46.4.268.
PMID: 22839984BACKGROUNDLawless ST. Crying wolf: false alarms in a pediatric intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1994 Jun;22(6):981-5.
PMID: 8205831BACKGROUNDTsien CL, Fackler JC. Poor prognosis for existing monitors in the intensive care unit. Crit Care Med. 1997 Apr;25(4):614-9. doi: 10.1097/00003246-199704000-00010.
PMID: 9142025BACKGROUNDChambrin 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 Dec;25(12):1360-6. doi: 10.1007/s001340051082.
PMID: 10660842BACKGROUNDAtzema 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 Jan;24(1):62-7. doi: 10.1016/j.ajem.2005.05.015.
PMID: 16338512BACKGROUNDSiebig S, Kuhls S, Imhoff M, Langgartner J, Reng M, Scholmerich J, Gather U, Wrede CE. Collection of annotated data in a clinical validation study for alarm algorithms in intensive care--a methodologic framework. J Crit Care. 2010 Mar;25(1):128-35. doi: 10.1016/j.jcrc.2008.09.001. Epub 2009 Jan 17.
PMID: 19327311BACKGROUND
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Julius C Pham, MD, PhD
Johns Hopkins University
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- not applicable
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- DOUBLE
- Who Masked
- PARTICIPANT, CARE PROVIDER
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- OTHER
- Responsible Party
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
- PI Title
- Associate Professor
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
January 17, 2014
First Posted
January 22, 2014
Study Start
April 1, 2013
Primary Completion
May 1, 2013
Study Completion
April 1, 2016
Last Updated
March 6, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-03