CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Finley, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, A. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Finley, G. A.
Right arrow Articles by Cohen, A. J.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 38, 958-964, Copyright © 1991 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Perceived urgency and the anaesthetist: responses to common operating room monitor alarms

GA Finley and AJ Cohen
Department of Anaesthesia, Dalhousie University.

Increasing numbers and varieties of electronic monitors are used in hospital operating rooms. Many of these are equipped with auditory alarms which are loud, insistent, or irritating, and thus are frequently disabled by the anaesthetist. This study was planned to evaluate two components of auditory alarm design which may influence the usefulness of the alarm: the perceived urgency of the auditory signal and its correlation with the urgency of the corresponding clinical situation. We also assessed the ability of practising anaesthetists to identify the monitor or condition responsible for the alarm. Sixty-four anaesthetists attending a national conference assessed ten common operating room alarm sounds for perceived urgency. Results were compared with the urgency of the corresponding clinical situation as determined by 12 senior anaesthetists. Discrepancies between the clinical and perceived urgencies of several monitor alarms were found, and there was no correlation between the two measures. The subjects were also tested for their ability to identify the alarm sounds correctly. The overall correct identification rate was 33%, and only two monitors were correctly identified by more than 50% of the subjects. The results of this study have implications for design and use of auditory alarms in hospitals and suggest the need for further research.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
R. S. Evans, K. V. Johnson, V. B. Flint, T. Kinder, C. R. Lyon, W. L. Hawley, D. K. Vawdrey, and G. E. Thomsen
Enhanced Notification of Critical Ventilator Events
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., November 1, 2005; 12(6): 589 - 595.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
T. A. Mondor and G. A. Finley
The perceived urgency of auditory warning alarms used in the hospital operating room is inappropriate: [Caractere inapproprie de l'urgence percue des alarmes sonores utilisees dans les salles d'operation d'hopitaux]
Can J Anesth, March 1, 2003; 50(3): 221 - 228.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1991 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.