MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Critical Incident with Narkomed 6000 Anesthesia System

2003· letter· en· W2004523372 on OpenAlex
Andrew G. Usher, Dominic Cave, Barry A. Finegan

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueAnesthesiology · 2003
Typeletter
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHealthcare Technology and Patient Monitoring
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta HospitalAlberta Hospital Edmonton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMains electricityBattery (electricity)BackupPower (physics)AnesthesiaFlammable liquidElectrical engineeringAutomotive engineeringVoltageComputer scienceEngineeringOperating systemWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the Editor:—We would like to report an incident with a Narkomed 6000 Anesthesia System (Draeger Medical, Inc., Telford, PA). An attendant was cleaning an unoccupied operating room when she witnessed a loud “bang,” followed by sparks coming from the bottom of the anesthesia machine. At the time of the noise, the attendant had been adjusting the position of the machine, which was connected to the electrical and gas mains supply but was switched off. The charge nurse, on arrival at the scene, noted smoke in the room. The machine was immediately disconnected from the electrical and gas mains supply, and the problem subsided.Subsequent analysis showed that a high-impedance short circuit had occurred between the metal can of a capacitor and traces on a printed circuit board in the power supply (Fig. 1). The power supply is located under the main body of the anesthesia machine, and there was minimal flammable material in the immediate area. The engineer's report concluded the incident was due to an intrinsic design fault and was not caused by cleaning solution that had been used to clean the floor prior to the incident. The manufacturer has implemented design changes and replaced the power supplies of all affected machines in Canada and the United States, and the event has been reported to the appropriate health authorities. The manufacturer noted that had the event occurred during use, the anesthesiologist could have disconnected the machine from the main supply with the operation continuing on battery backup, although we would choose to immediately replace the machine, given the unknown status of the internal components.Until recently, reports of operating room fires and explosions caused by anesthesia equipment were usually attributable to flammable or explosive anesthetic agents 1or to contamination of pressurized gas systems with dust or oil. 2,3The development of sophisticated electronics in anesthesia machines has been associated with occasional reports of malfunctions and one previous report of an electrical fire. 4This event is an important reminder of the risks that modern anesthesia equipment may bring to the operating room. Prompt reporting of critical incidents allows the rapid investigation and implementation of design improvements to this equipment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.259
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it