• Karen E Raymer, Johan Bergström, and James M Nyce.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada. karenraymer@cogeco.ca
• Ergonomics. 2012 Jan 1;55(12):1487-501.

UnlabelledThe development of physiologic monitors has contributed to the decline in morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing anaesthesia. Diverse factors (physiologic, technical, historical and medico-legal) create challenges for monitor alarm designers. Indeed, a growing body of literature suggests that alarms function sub-optimally in supporting the human operator. Despite existing technology that could allow more appropriate design, most anaesthesia alarms still operate on simple, pre-set thresholds. Arguing that more alarms do not necessarily make for safer alarms is difficult in a litigious medico-legal environment and a competitive marketplace. The resultant commitment to the status quo exposes the risks that a lack of an evidence-based theoretical framework for anaesthesia alarm design presents. In this review, two specific theoretical foundations with relevance to anaesthesia alarms are summarised. The potential significance that signal detection theory and cognitive systems engineering could have in improving anaesthesia alarm design is outlined and future research directions are suggested.Practitioner SummaryThe development of physiologic monitors has increased safety for patients undergoing anaesthesia. Evidence suggests that the full potential of the alarms embedded within those monitors is not being realised. In this review article, the authors propose a theoretical framework that could lead to the development of more ergonomic anaesthesia alarms.

10 keywords...

hide…