Bed-exit alarm effectiveness
Bed-exit alarm effectiveness
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.archger.2008.04.007
复制
发表时间：
2009-07-01
影响因子：
4
通讯作者：
Secic, Michelle
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Capezuti, Elizabeth;Brush, Barbara L.;Secic, Michelle
本研究描述了两种类型的离床报警器检测离床身体运动的准确性：压敏和压敏结合红外（IR）光束检测器（双传感器系统）。我们还评估了滋扰警报的发生率，或当参与者不试图下床时激活的警报。14名疗养院居民被直接观察了总共256个夜晚或1636.5小时：平均18.3 +/- 22.3（+/-S.D.）平均6.4 +/- 1.2小时/晚。通过重复测量调整身体运动后，泊松回归建模，最小二乘调整均值（LSM）显示报警组类型之间在真阳性（NTP）数量（平均值/S.E.M.）上存在轻微显著差异。= 0.086/1.617），表明双传感器报警可能具有更高的NTP。虽然双传感器离床警报在识别离床身体运动和减少假警报发生率方面比压敏警报更准确，但假警报并未完全消除。警报不能替代工作人员：当居民需要或希望离开病床时，仍然需要足够的工作人员。(C)2008爱思唯尔爱尔兰有限公司保留所有权利。
This study describes the accuracy of two types of bed-exit alarms to detect bed-exiting body movements: pressure-sensitive and a pressure-sensitive combined with infrared (IR)beam detectors (dual sensor system). We also evaluated the occurrence of nuisance alarms, or alarms that are activated when a participant does not attempt to get out of bed. Fourteen nursing home residents were directly observed for a total of 256 nights or 1636.5 h: an average of 18.3 +/- 22.3 (+/-S.D.) nights/participant for an average of 6.4 +/- 1.2 h/night. After adjusting for body movements via repeated measures, Poisson regression modeling, the least squares adjusted means (LSM) show a marginally significant difference between the type of alarm groups on the number of true positives (NTP) (mean/S.E.M. = 0.086/1.617) for pressure-sensitive versus dual sensor alarm (0.593/1.238; p = 0.0599) indicating that the dual sensor alarm may have a higher NTP. While the dual sensor bed-exit alarm was more accurate than the pressure-sensitive alarm in identifying bed-exiting body movements and reducing the incidence of false alarms, false alarms were not eliminated altogether. Alarms are not a substitute for staff: adequate staff availability is still necessary when residents need or wish to exit bed. (C) 2008 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.