↓ Skip to main content

BMJ

Frequency, duration and cause of ventilator alarms on a neonatal intensive care unit

Overview of attention for article published in Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (87th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (70th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
Title
Frequency, duration and cause of ventilator alarms on a neonatal intensive care unit
Published in
Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition, October 2017
DOI 10.1136/archdischild-2017-313493
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gusztav Belteki, Colin J Morley

Abstract

To investigate the frequency and cause of neonatal ventilator alarms. Neonatal ventilators frequently alarm and also disturb babies, parents and nurses. If frequent they may cause alarm fatigue and be ignored. The number, frequency and details of neonatal ventilator alarms are unreported. We developed programs for retrieving and analysing ventilator data each second on alarms and ventilation parameters from 46 babies ventilated with Dräger Babylog VN500 ventilators using various modes. A mean of 60 hours was recorded per baby. Over 116 days, 27 751 alarms occurred. On average, that was 603 per baby and 10 per hour. Median (IQR) alarm duration was 10 (4-21) s. Type, frequency and duration varied between infants. Some babies had >10% of their time with alarms. Eight alarm types caused ~99% of all alarms. Three alarms, 'MV <low limit', 'MV >high limit' and 'respiratory rate >high limit', caused 46.6%, often due to inappropriate settings. 49.9% were due to a low expired tidal volume during volume guarantee ventilation, often due to the maximum pressure being set too low. 26 106 (94.1%) of all alarms lasted <1 min. However, 86 alarms lasted >10 min and 16 alarms >1 hour. Similar alarms were frequently clustered, sometimes >100/hour. Frequent ventilator alarms are caused by physiological variability in the respiratory rate or minute volume, inappropriate alarm limits or too low maximum peak inflating pressure during volume-targeted ventilation. While most alarms were very short, sometimes alarms were ignored by neonatal intensive care unit staff for long periods.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 6 17%
Other 5 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 14%
Researcher 5 14%
Lecturer 2 6%
Other 7 19%
Unknown 6 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 9 25%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 14%
Computer Science 3 8%
Engineering 3 8%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 11 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 July 2018.
All research outputs
#2,168,578
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition
#318
of 2,053 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#42,132
of 339,185 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Archives of Disease in Childhood -- Fetal & Neonatal Edition
#17
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,053 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 339,185 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.