The response of theatre personnel to the pulse oximeter alarm

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Background: False alarms and sounds in the operating theatre (OT) that alert personnel to a crisis can be irritating. This can result in personnel ignoring genuine alarm warnings. This study was carried out to determine how alert OT personnel are in response to the pulse oximeter alarm. Method: For the purposes of the study, 144 elective and 126 emergency cases, comprising 189 general anaesthesia and 81 regional anaesthesia cases, were included. After ensuring that the patients were physiologically stable, a false pulse oximeter alarm was activated. No other alarms were triggered. The first person to respond, time taken to respond, and the mode of action taken, were recorded. If no action resulted, the alarm was terminated a minute later. Results: The anaesthesiologist was the most alert (p-value < 0.05), with a median time taken to respond of nine (4-14) seconds. The emergency OT personnel were significantly more alert than the elective OT personnel, with a p-value of < 0.001. The level of readiness was similar in both general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia cases [ 9.5 seconds (4.0- 14.05) vs. 10 seconds (5-15)]. In 53% of cases, the first person to respond attended to the patients; in 30.7% of cases, they checked the monitor; and in 5.6% of cases, the pulse oximeter alarm was deactivated. The pulse oximeter alarm was ignored, and no action taken, in 10.7% of cases. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists were the most alert in responding to the pulse oximetry alarm, although, alarmingly, no action was taken in 10.7% of cases.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)101-104
Number of pages4
JournalSouthern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia
Volume18
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2012

Fingerprint

Pulse
Conduction Anesthesia
General Anesthesia
Emergencies
Oximetry

Keywords

  • Alarm
  • Alertness
  • Anaesthesia
  • Anaesthesiologist
  • Pulse oximeter

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

@article{1a354de57d6e4c0db50b5988c60daf27,
title = "The response of theatre personnel to the pulse oximeter alarm",
abstract = "Background: False alarms and sounds in the operating theatre (OT) that alert personnel to a crisis can be irritating. This can result in personnel ignoring genuine alarm warnings. This study was carried out to determine how alert OT personnel are in response to the pulse oximeter alarm. Method: For the purposes of the study, 144 elective and 126 emergency cases, comprising 189 general anaesthesia and 81 regional anaesthesia cases, were included. After ensuring that the patients were physiologically stable, a false pulse oximeter alarm was activated. No other alarms were triggered. The first person to respond, time taken to respond, and the mode of action taken, were recorded. If no action resulted, the alarm was terminated a minute later. Results: The anaesthesiologist was the most alert (p-value < 0.05), with a median time taken to respond of nine (4-14) seconds. The emergency OT personnel were significantly more alert than the elective OT personnel, with a p-value of < 0.001. The level of readiness was similar in both general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia cases [ 9.5 seconds (4.0- 14.05) vs. 10 seconds (5-15)]. In 53{\%} of cases, the first person to respond attended to the patients; in 30.7{\%} of cases, they checked the monitor; and in 5.6{\%} of cases, the pulse oximeter alarm was deactivated. The pulse oximeter alarm was ignored, and no action taken, in 10.7{\%} of cases. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists were the most alert in responding to the pulse oximetry alarm, although, alarmingly, no action was taken in 10.7{\%} of cases.",
keywords = "Alarm, Alertness, Anaesthesia, Anaesthesiologist, Pulse oximeter",
author = "{Abdul Rahman}, Raha and A. Aswad and Muhammad Maaya and Azarinah Izaham and Nurlia Yahya",
year = "2012",
language = "English",
volume = "18",
pages = "101--104",
journal = "Southern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia",
issn = "2220-1181",
publisher = "In House Publications",
number = "2",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - The response of theatre personnel to the pulse oximeter alarm

AU - Abdul Rahman, Raha

AU - Aswad, A.

AU - Maaya, Muhammad

AU - Izaham, Azarinah

AU - Yahya, Nurlia

PY - 2012

Y1 - 2012

N2 - Background: False alarms and sounds in the operating theatre (OT) that alert personnel to a crisis can be irritating. This can result in personnel ignoring genuine alarm warnings. This study was carried out to determine how alert OT personnel are in response to the pulse oximeter alarm. Method: For the purposes of the study, 144 elective and 126 emergency cases, comprising 189 general anaesthesia and 81 regional anaesthesia cases, were included. After ensuring that the patients were physiologically stable, a false pulse oximeter alarm was activated. No other alarms were triggered. The first person to respond, time taken to respond, and the mode of action taken, were recorded. If no action resulted, the alarm was terminated a minute later. Results: The anaesthesiologist was the most alert (p-value < 0.05), with a median time taken to respond of nine (4-14) seconds. The emergency OT personnel were significantly more alert than the elective OT personnel, with a p-value of < 0.001. The level of readiness was similar in both general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia cases [ 9.5 seconds (4.0- 14.05) vs. 10 seconds (5-15)]. In 53% of cases, the first person to respond attended to the patients; in 30.7% of cases, they checked the monitor; and in 5.6% of cases, the pulse oximeter alarm was deactivated. The pulse oximeter alarm was ignored, and no action taken, in 10.7% of cases. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists were the most alert in responding to the pulse oximetry alarm, although, alarmingly, no action was taken in 10.7% of cases.

AB - Background: False alarms and sounds in the operating theatre (OT) that alert personnel to a crisis can be irritating. This can result in personnel ignoring genuine alarm warnings. This study was carried out to determine how alert OT personnel are in response to the pulse oximeter alarm. Method: For the purposes of the study, 144 elective and 126 emergency cases, comprising 189 general anaesthesia and 81 regional anaesthesia cases, were included. After ensuring that the patients were physiologically stable, a false pulse oximeter alarm was activated. No other alarms were triggered. The first person to respond, time taken to respond, and the mode of action taken, were recorded. If no action resulted, the alarm was terminated a minute later. Results: The anaesthesiologist was the most alert (p-value < 0.05), with a median time taken to respond of nine (4-14) seconds. The emergency OT personnel were significantly more alert than the elective OT personnel, with a p-value of < 0.001. The level of readiness was similar in both general anaesthesia and regional anaesthesia cases [ 9.5 seconds (4.0- 14.05) vs. 10 seconds (5-15)]. In 53% of cases, the first person to respond attended to the patients; in 30.7% of cases, they checked the monitor; and in 5.6% of cases, the pulse oximeter alarm was deactivated. The pulse oximeter alarm was ignored, and no action taken, in 10.7% of cases. Conclusion: The anaesthesiologists were the most alert in responding to the pulse oximetry alarm, although, alarmingly, no action was taken in 10.7% of cases.

KW - Alarm

KW - Alertness

KW - Anaesthesia

KW - Anaesthesiologist

KW - Pulse oximeter

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84860667970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84860667970&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

VL - 18

SP - 101

EP - 104

JO - Southern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia

JF - Southern African Journal of Anaesthesia and Analgesia

SN - 2220-1181

IS - 2

ER -