MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2988541147 · doi:10.2196/14123

Types and Frequency of Infusion Pump Alarms and Infusion-Interruption to Infusion-Recovery Times for Critical Short Half-Life Infusions: Retrospective Data Analysis

2019· article· en· W2988541147 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
James Waterson, Arkadiusz Bedner

Notice bibliographique

RevueJMIR Human Factors · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésInfusion pumpInfusion therapyTarget controlled infusionAnesthesiaMedicineContinuous infusion

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Alarm fatigue commonly leads to a reduced response to alarms. Appropriate and timely response to intravenous pump alarms is crucial to infusion continuity. The difficulty of filtering out critical short half-life infusion alarms from nonurgent alarms is a key challenge for risk management for clinicians. Critical care areas provide ample opportunities for intravenous medication error with the frequent administration of high-alert, critical short half-life infusions that require rigorous maintenance for continuity of delivery. Most serious medication errors in critical care occur during the execution of treatment, with performance-level failures outweighing rule-based or knowledge-based mistakes. OBJECTIVE: One objective of this study was to establish baseline data for the types and frequency of alarms that critical care clinicians are exposed to from a variety of infusion devices, including both large volume pumps and syringe drivers. Another objective was to identify the volume of these alarms that specifically relate to critical short half-life infusions and to evaluate user response times to alarms from infusion devices delivering these particular infusions. METHODS: The event logs of 1183 infusion pumps used in critical care environments and in general care areas within the European region were mined for a range of alarm states. The study then focused on a selection of infusion alarms from devices delivering critical short half-life infusions that would warrant rapid attention from clinicians in order to avoid potentially harmful prolonged infusion interruption. The reaction time of clinicians to infusion-interruption states and alarms for the selected critical short half-life infusions was then calculated. RESULTS: Initial analysis showed a mean average of 4.50 alarms per infusion in the general critical care pump population as opposed to the whole hospital rate of 1.39. In the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) group, the alarms per infusion value was significantly above the mean average for all critical care areas, with 8.61 alarms per infusion. Infusion-interruption of critical short half-life infusions was found to be a significant problem in all areas of the general critical care pump population, with a significant number of downstream (ie, vein and access) occlusion events noted. While the mean and median response times to critical short half-life infusion interruptions were generally within the half-lives of the selected medications, there was a high prevalence of outliers in terms of reaction times for all the critical short half-life infusions studied. CONCLUSIONS: This study gives an indication of what might be expected in critical care environments in terms of the volume of general infusion alarms and critical short half-life infusion alarms, as well as for clinician reaction times to critical short half-life infusion-interruption events. This study also identifies potentially problematic areas of the hospital for alarm fatigue and for particular issues of infusion and infusion-line management. Application of the proposed protocols can help create benchmarks for pump alarm management and clinician reaction times. These protocols can be applied to studies on the impact of alarm fatigue and for the evaluation of protocols, infusion-monitoring strategies, and infusion pump-based medication safety software aimed at reducing alarm fatigue and ensuring the maintenance of critical short half-life infusions. Given the frequency of infusion alarms seen in this study, the risk of alarm fatigue due to the white noise of pump alarms present in critical care, to which clinicians are constantly exposed, is very high. Furthermore, the added difficulties of maintaining critical short half-life infusions, and other infusions in specialist areas, are made clear by the high ratio of downstream occlusion to infusion starts in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). The ability to quantitatively track the volume of alarms and clinician reaction times contributes to a greater understanding of the issues of alarm fatigue in intensive care units. This can be applied to clinical audit, can allow for targeted training to reduce nuisance alarms, and can aid in planning for improvement in the key area of maintenance of steady-state plasma levels of critical short half-life infusions. One clear conclusion is that the medication administration rights should be extended to include right maintenance and ensured delivery continuity of critical short half-life infusions.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,007
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,019
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,007
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,037

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0070,019
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,002
Bibliométrie0,0060,005
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0010,001
Science ouverte0,0010,001
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,071
Tête enseignante GPT0,394
Écart entre enseignants0,323 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeObservationnel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations27
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueJMIR Human FactorsMême sujetHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringTravaux en français237 207