Multicentric study at monitoring alarms in the adult intensive care unit (ICU): A descriptive analysis

181Citations
Citations of this article
140Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Objectives: To assess the relevance of current monitoring alarms as a warning system in the adult ICU. Design: Prospective, observational study. Settings: Two university hospital, and three general hospital, ICUs. Patients: Hundred thirty-one patients, ventilated at admission, from different shifts (morning, evening, night) combined with different stages of stay, early (0-3 days), intermediate (4-6 days) and late (> 6 days). Interventions: Experienced nurses were asked to record the patient's characteristics and, for each alarm event, the reason, type and consequence. Measurements and main results: The mean age of the patients included was 59.8 ± 16.4 and SAPS1 was 15.9 ± 7.4. We recorded 1971 h of care. The shift distribution was 78 mornings, 85 evenings and 83 nights; the stage distribution was 88 early, 78 intermediate and 80 late. There were 3188 alarms, an average of one alarm every 37 min: 23.7% were due to staff manipulation, 17.5% to technical problems and 58.8% to the patients. Alarms originated from ventilators (37.8%), cardiovascular monitors (32.7%), pulse oximeters (14.9%) and capnography (13.5%). Of the alarms, 25.8% had a consequence such as sensor repositioning, suction, modification of the therapy (drug or ventilation). Only 5.9% of the alarms led to a physician's being called. The positive predictive value of an alarm was 27% and its negative predictive value was 99%. The sensitivity was 97% and the specificity 58%. Conclusions: The study confirms that the level of monitoring in ICUs generates a great number of false-positive alarms.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Chambrin, M. C., Calvelo-Aros, D., Jaborska, A., Chopin, C., Ravaux, P., & Boniface, B. (1999). Multicentric study at monitoring alarms in the adult intensive care unit (ICU): A descriptive analysis. Intensive Care Medicine, 25(12), 1360–1366. https://doi.org/10.1007/s001340051082

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free