Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 13, 2026

A Practical Guide for the Production and PET/CT Imaging of 68Ga-DOTATATE for Neuroendocrine Tumors in Daily Clinical Practice
Published on: April 17, 2019
Attitudes and Practices Related to Clinical Alarms: A Follow-up Survey
Halley Ruppel1, Marjorie Funk2, J Tobey Clark2
1Halley Ruppel is a PhD candidate and a Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Future of Nursing Scholar and Marjorie Funk is the Helen Porter Jayne and Martha Prosser Jayne Professor of Nursing at Yale School of Nursing, West Haven, Connecticut. J. Tobey Clark is engineering supervisor, Instrumentation and Technical Services, University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont. Izabella Gieras is director of clinical technology, Huntington Hospital, Pasadena, California. Yadin David is the principal of Biomedical Engineering Consultants, LLC, and assistant professor (adjunct) at the University of Texas School of Public Health, Houston, Texas. Thomas J. Bauld, now retired, was a biomedical engineer at the Veterans Administration National Center for Patient Safety, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Paul Coss is president of the Healthcare Technology Foundation, Plymouth Meeting, Pennsylvania. Margaret L. Holland is an associate research scientist at Yale School of Nursing. halley.ruppel@yale.edu.
Background:
Alarm fatigue is a widely acknowledged patient safety concern in hospitals. In 2013, The Joint Commission issued a National Patient Safety Goal on Alarm Management, making addressing alarm management a priority. To capture changes in attitudes and practices related to alarms, the Healthcare Technology Foundation conducted and reported findings from national online surveys in 2006 and 2011 and completed a third survey in 2016.
Objectives:
The goal of the 2016 survey was to identify how hospital practices and clinicians' perceptions of alarms have changed since 2006.
Methods:
The online survey was distributed via national health care organizations during a 2-month period. Results of the 2016 survey (N = 1241) were compared with results of the 2006 and 2011 surveys by using χ2 and Kruskal-Wallis analyses.
Results:
Responses were significantly different for almost all items across the 3 surveys. Respondents in 2016 were more likely to agree that nuisance alarms occur frequently and disrupt patient care and were less likely to agree that clinical staff responds quickly to alarms. Compared with respondents in 2011, those in 2016 were almost twice as likely to report that their hospitals had experienced adverse events related to alarms in the past 2 years. However, in 2016 a much higher proportion of respondents indicated that their hospitals had implemented alarm improvement initiatives.
Conclusions:
Although survey findings show disappointing trends in the past 10 years, including worsening perceptions of nuisance alarms and more alarm-related adverse events, the increase in alarm improvement initiatives is encouraging.
More Related Videos
11:50Clinical Practice Protocol of Creative Music Therapy for Preterm Infants and Their Parents in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit
Published on: January 7, 2020
07:43Methods for Image-based Surveys of Benthic Macroinvertebrates and Their Habitat Exemplified by the Drop Camera Survey for the Atlantic Sea Scallop
Published on: July 2, 2018
Related Concept Videos
Attitudes
Surveys
Introduction to Surveying, Plane Surveying and Geodetic Surveys
Errors and Mistakes in Surveying
Types of Surveys
Survey Safety