Background Alarm fatigue (AF) is a distressing factor for staff and patients in the hospital. Using cardiac telemetry (CT) without clinical indications can create unnecessary alarms, and increase AF and cost of healthcare. We sought to reduce AF and cost associated with CT monitoring.
Methods After implementing a new protocol for CT placement, data were collected on telemetry orders, alarms and bed cost for 13 weeks from 1 January 2015 through 31 March 2015. We also retrospectively collected data on the same variables for the 13 weeks prior to the intervention. A survey was administered to nurses to assess past and present perceptions of AF. Interventions included protocol creation and education for participants.
Results At baseline, 77% of patients were monitored with CT. A total of 145 (31%) order discrepancies were discovered during data collection, of which 72% had no indication for CT, so CT was discontinued. The other 28% had indications, so orders were placed. A total of 8336 alarms were recorded during 4 weeks of data collection, of which 333 (4%) were classified as true actionable alarms. Postintervention data showed 67% CT assignment with 10% reduction in CT usage, with no increase in mortality (p<0.001 and >0.05, respectively). A 42% cost reduction was achieved after adjusting the patient status. Nurses reported 27% perceived reduction in AF. One-year follow-up revealed that 69% of patients were being monitored by CT, and the rate of order discrepancies due to lack of indication was 9%.
Conclusion All hospital units may benefit from the protocols created during this study. If applied appropriately, these protocols can lead to reduced AF and cost per episode of care.
- Alarm fatigue
- Cardiac telemetry monitoring
- Cost in healthcare
- Provider education
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Contributors AAA: designed the project, analysed data and authored the manuscript. CRA, SHP, REM: participated in data collection and manuscript review. KMT: critically reviewed the project and the manuscript. MJM: principal investigator, designed the project and reviewed the manuscript.
Funding Internal funding was provided through departmental resources.
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.