Stats on the desats: alarm fatigue and the implications for patient safety.

BACKGROUND: Physiological monitoring systems, like Masimo, used during inpatient hospitalisation, offer a non-invasive approach to capture critical vital signs data. These systems trigger alarms when measurements deviate from preset parameters. However, often non-urgent or potentially false alarms contribute to 'alarm fatigue,' a form of sensory overload that can have adverse effects on both patients and healthcare staff. The Joint Commission, in 2021, announced a target to mitigate alarm fatigue-related fatalities through improved alarm management. Yet, no established guidelines are presently available. This study aims to address alarm fatigue at the Mayo Clinic to safeguard patient safety, curb staff burnout and improve the sensitivity of oxygen saturation monitoring to promptly detect emergencies. METHODS: A quality improvement project was conducted to combat minimise the false alarm burden, with data collected 2 months prior to intervention commencement. The project's goal was to decrease the total alarm value by 20% from 55%-85% to 35%-75% within 2 months, leveraging quality improvement methodologies. INTERVENTIONS: February to April 2021, we implemented a two-pronged intervention: (1) instituting a protocol to evaluate patients' continuous monitoring needs and discontinuing it when appropriate, and (2) introducing educational signage for patients and Mayo Clinic staff on monitoring best practices. RESULTS: Baseline averages of red alarms (158.6), manual snoozes (37.8) and self-resolves (120.7); the first postintervention phase showed reductions in red alarms (125.5), manual snoozes (17.8) and self-resolves (107.8). Second postintervention phase recorded 138 red alarms, 13 manual snoozes and 125 self-resolves. Baseline comparison demonstrated an average of 16.92% reduction of alarms among both interventions (p value: 0.25). CONCLUSION: Simple interventions like education and communication techniques proved instrumental in lessening the alarm burden for patients and staff. The findings underscore the practical use and efficacy of these methods in any healthcare setting, thus contributing to mitigating the prevalent issue of alarm fatigue.

Artificial Intelligence-Enabled Assessment of the Heart Rate Corrected QT Interval Using a Mobile Electrocardiogram Device.

BACKGROUND: Heart rate-corrected QT interval (QTc) prolongation, whether secondary to drugs, genetics including congenital long QT syndrome, and/or systemic diseases including SARS-CoV-2-mediated coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), can predispose to ventricular arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death. Currently, QTc assessment and monitoring relies largely on 12-lead electrocardiography. As such, we sought to train and validate an artificial intelligence (AI)-enabled 12-lead ECG algorithm to determine the QTc, and then prospectively test this algorithm on tracings acquired from a mobile ECG (mECG) device in a population enriched for repolarization abnormalities. METHODS: Using >1.6 million 12-lead ECGs from 538 200 patients, a deep neural network (DNN) was derived (patients for training, n = 250 767; patients for testing, n = 107 920) and validated (n = 179 513 patients) to predict the QTc using cardiologist-overread QTc values as the "gold standard". The ability of this DNN to detect clinically-relevant QTc prolongation (eg, QTc ≥500 ms) was then tested prospectively on 686 patients with genetic heart disease (50% with long QT syndrome) with QTc values obtained from both a 12-lead ECG and a prototype mECG device equivalent to the commercially-available AliveCor KardiaMobile 6L. RESULTS: In the validation sample, strong agreement was observed between human over-read and DNN-predicted QTc values (-1.76±23.14 ms). Similarly, within the prospective, genetic heart disease-enriched dataset, the difference between DNN-predicted QTc values derived from mECG tracings and those annotated from 12-lead ECGs by a QT expert (-0.45±24.73 ms) and a commercial core ECG laboratory [10.52±25.64 ms] was nominal. When applied to mECG tracings, the DNN's ability to detect a QTc value ≥500 ms yielded an area under the curve, sensitivity, and specificity of 0.97, 80.0%, and 94.4%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Using smartphone-enabled electrodes, an AI DNN can predict accurately the QTc of a standard 12-lead ECG. QTc estimation from an AI-enabled mECG device may provide a cost-effective means of screening for both acquired and congenital long QT syndrome in a variety of clinical settings where standard 12-lead electrocardiography is not accessible or cost-effective.