z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Classifying Alarms: Seeking Durability, Credibility, Consistency, and Simplicity
Author(s) -
Judy Edworthy,
Joseph J. Schlesinger,
Richard R. McNeer,
Michael Kristensen,
Christopher Bennett
Publication year - 2017
Publication title -
biomedical instrumentation and technology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.206
H-Index - 28
eISSN - 1943-5967
pISSN - 0899-8205
DOI - 10.2345/0899-8205-51.s2.50
Subject(s) - layperson , superordinate goals , credibility , simplicity , computer science , consistency (knowledge bases) , alarm , psychology , engineering , artificial intelligence , social psychology , epistemology , political science , law , aerospace engineering , philosophy
Alongside the development and testing of new audible alarms intended to support International Electrotechnical Commission 60601-1-8, a global standard concerned with alarm safety, the categories of risk that the standard denotes require further thought and possible updating. In this article, we revisit the origins of the categories covered by the standard. These categories were based on the ways that tissue damage can be caused. We consider these categories from the varied professional perspectives of the authors: human factors, semiotics, clinical practice, and the patient or family (layperson). We conclude that while the categories possess many clinically applicable and defensible features from our range of perspectives, the advances in alarm design now available may allow a more flexible approach. We present a three-tier system with superordinate, basic, and subordinate levels that fit both within the thinking embodied in the current standard and possible new developments.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom