Role of Large Clinical Datasets From Physiologic Monitors in Improving the Safety of Clinical Alarm Systems and Methodological Considerations: A Case From Philips Monitors

State of Science in Alarm System Safety: Implications for Researchers, Vendors, and Clinical Leaders

Alarm fatigue is a complex phenomenon that needs to be assessed within the context of the clinical setting. Considering that complexity, the available information on how to address alarm fatigue and improve alarm system safety is relatively scarce. This article summarizes the state of science in alarm system safety based on the eight dimensions of a sociotechnical model for studying health information technology in complex adaptive healthcare systems. The summary and recommendations were guided by available systematic reviews on the topic, interventional studies published between January 2019 and February 2022, and recommendations and evidence-based practice interventions published by professional organizations. The current article suggests implications to help researchers respond to the gap in science related to alarm safety, help vendors design safe monitoring systems, and help clinical leaders apply evidence-based strategies to improve alarm safety in their settings. Physiologic monitors in intensive care units-the devices most commonly used in complex care environments and associated with the highest number of alarms and deaths-are the focus of the current work.

Improving the Safety, Effectiveness, and Efficiency of Clinical Alarm Systems: Simulation-Based Usability Testing of Physiologic Monitors

BACKGROUND

Clinical alarm system safety is a national patient safety goal in the United States. Physiologic monitors are associated with the highest number of device alarms and alarm-related deaths. However, research involving nurses' use of physiologic monitors is rare. Hence, the identification of critical usability issues for monitors, especially those related to patient safety, is a nursing imperative.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined nurses' usability of physiologic monitors in intensive care units with respect to the effectiveness and efficiency of monitor use.

METHODS

In total, 30 nurses from 4 adult intensive care units completed 40 tasks in a simulation environment. The tasks were common monitoring tasks that were crucial for appropriate monitoring and safe alarm management across four categories of competencies: admitting, transferring, and discharging patients using the monitors (7 tasks); managing measurements and monitor settings (23 tasks); performing electrocardiogram (ECG) analysis (7 tasks); and troubleshooting alarm conditions (3 tasks). The nurse-monitor interaction was video-recorded. The principal investigator and two expert intensive care units nurse educators identified, classified, and validated task success (effectiveness) and the time of task completion (efficiency).

RESULTS

Among the 40 tasks, only 2 (5%) were successfully completed by all the nurses. At least 1-27 (3%-90%) nurses abandoned or did not correctly perform 38 tasks. The task with the shortest completion time was "take monitor out of standby" (mean 0:02, SD 0:01 min:s), whereas the task "record a 25 mm/s ECG strip of any of the ECG leads" had the longest completion time (mean 1:14, SD 0:32 min:s). The total time to complete 37 navigation-related tasks ranged from a minimum of 3 min 57 s to a maximum of 32 min 42 s. Regression analysis showed that it took 6 s per click or step to successfully complete a task. To understand the nurses' thought processes during monitor navigation, the authors analyzed the paths of the 2 tasks with the lowest successful completion rates, where only 13% (4/30) of the nurses correctly completed these 2 tasks. Although 30% (9/30) of the nurses accessed the correct screen first for task 1 and task 2, they could not find their way easily from there to successfully complete the 2 tasks.

CONCLUSIONS

Usability testing of physiologic monitors revealed major ineffectiveness and inefficiencies in the current nurse-monitor interactions. The results indicate the potential for safety and productivity issues in completing routine tasks. Training on monitor use should include critical monitoring functions that are necessary for safe, effective, efficient, and appropriate monitoring to include knowledge of the shortest navigation path. It is imperative that vendors' future monitor designs mimic clinicians' thought processes for successful, safe, and efficient monitor navigation.

Educational Program for Physiologic Monitor Use and Alarm Systems Safety: A Toolkit

Clinical alarm systems safety is a national healthcare concern in the United States. Physiologic monitors are the medical devices associated with the highest number of false and clinically insignificant alarms, producing alarm fatigue and a challenge to meet the national clinical alarm systems safety goal. Modern physiologic monitors are high-tech complex devices with multimeasurement modalities and high sensitivity for alarms. This complexity hinders safe operation of the monitors by nurses and appropriate management of associated alarms. Nurses need to integrate cognitive knowledge, psychomotor skills, and critical thinking to safely operate the monitors and support clinical decisions. Limited resources are available to support clinical education for nurses on physiologic monitor use and alarm management. This toolkit presents an educational framework for physiologic monitor use and alarm safety guided by adult learning principles. The components of the program are (1) knowledge, skills, and attitude of physiologic monitor use; (2) scenario-based learning model to support the knowledge, skills, and attitude necessary for safe monitor use; and (3) a framework for evaluating the educational program. Education should be ongoing and customized per facility to ensure safe use of complex technology and to decrease alarm fatigue, the leading cause of alarm-related sentinel events.

Alarm Safety and Alarm Fatigue

Clinical alarm systems have received significant attention in recent years following warnings from hospital accrediting and health care technology organizations regarding patient harm caused by unsafe practices. Alarm desensitization or fatigue from frequent, false, or unnecessary alarms, has led to serious events and even patient deaths. Other concerns include settings inappropriate to patient population or condition, inadequate staff training, and improper use or disabling. Research on human factors in alarm response and of functionality of medical devices will help clinicians develop appropriate policies, practices, and device settings for clinical alarms in neonatal intensive care units.

Nurse Competence on Physiologic Monitors Use: Toward Eliminating Alarm Fatigue in Intensive Care Units

BACKGROUND

Studies on nurse competence on alarm management are a few and tend to be focused on limited skills. In response to Phase II of implementing the National Patient Safety Goal on clinical alarm systems safety, this study assessed nurses' perceived competence on physiologic monitors use in intensive care units (ICUs) and developed and validated a tool for this purpose.

METHODS

This descriptive study took place in a Magnet hospital in a Southwestern state of the U.S. A Nurse Competence on Philips Physiologic Monitors Use Survey was created and went through validation by 13 expert ICU nurses. The survey included 5 subscales with 59 rated items and two open-ended questions. Items on the first 4 subscales reflect most common tasks nurses perform using physiologic monitors. Items on the fifth subscale (advanced functions) reflect rarely used skills and were included to understand the scope of utilizing advanced physiologic monitors' features. Thirty nurses from 4 adult ICUs were invited to respond to the survey.

RESULTS

Thirty nurses (100%) responded to the survey. The majority of nurses were from Neuro (47%) and Surgical Trauma (37%) ICUs. The data supported the high reliability and construct validity of the survey. At least one (3%) to 8 nurses (27%) reported lack of confidence on each item on the survey. On the first four subscales, 3% - 40% of the nurses reported they had never heard of or used 27 features/functions on the monitors. No relationships were found between subscales' scores and demographic characteristics (p > .05). Nurses asked for training on navigating the central-station monitor and troubleshooting alarms, and the use of unit-specific super users to tailor training to users' needs.

CONCLUSION

This is the first study to create and test a list of competencies for physiologic monitors use. Rigorous, periodic and individualized training is essential for safe and appropriate use of physiologic monitors and to decrease alarm fatigue. Training should be comprehensive to include all necessary skills and should not assume proficiency on basic skills. Special attention should be focused on managing technical alarms. Increasing the number of super users is a recommended strategy for individualized and unit-specific training. There is a need for a usability testing of complex IT-equipped medical devices, such as physiologic monitors, for effective, efficient and safe navigation of the monitors.