MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Critical Incident with Narkomed 6000 Anesthesia System

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

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Case report · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0130.012
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.003

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designCase report
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnesthesiologySame topicHealthcare Technology and Patient MonitoringFrench-language works237,207