Observational studyResearch in nursing & health2020
Unit-level variation in bed alarm use in US hospitals.
Observational study in Research in nursing & health, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
- Hospital Fall Prevention Practices and Implementation Strategies: A Multisite Observational Study.Journal of patient safety · 2026Article
- Selecting and tailoring implementation strategies for deimplementing fall prevention alarms in US hospitals: a group concept mapping study.BMJ quality & safety · 2026Article
- Nurse-led fall prevention programs in acute care settings: An integrative review.International journal of nursing studies advances · 2025Review
- Alarm with care-a de-implementation strategy to reduce fall prevention alarm use in US hospitals: a study protocol for a hybrid 2 effectiveness-implementation trial.Implementation science : IS · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 6 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Bed and chair alarms are widely used in hospitals, despite lack of effectiveness and unintended negative consequences. In this cross-sectional, observational study, we examined alarm prevalence and contributions of patient- and unit-level factors to alarm use on 59 acute care nursing units in 57 US hospitals participating in the National Database of Nursing Quality Indicators®. Nursing unit staff reported data on patient-level fall risk and fall prevention measures for 1,489 patients. Patient-level propensity scores for alarm use were estimated using logistic regression. Expected alarm use on each unit, defined as the mean patient propensity-for-alarm score, was compared with the observed rate of alarm use. Over one-third of patients assessed had an alarm in the "on" position. Patient characteristics associated with higher odds of alarm use included recent fall, need for ambulation assistance, poor mobility judgment, and altered mental status. Observed rates of unit alarm use ranged from 0% to 100% (median 33%, 10th percentile 5%, 90th percentile 67%). Expected alarm use varied less (median 31%, 10th percentile 27%, and 90th percentile 45%). Only 29% of variability in observed alarm use was accounted for by expected alarm use. Unit assignment was a stronger predictor of alarm use than patient-level fall risk variables. Alarm use is common, varies widely across hospitals, and cannot be fully explained by patient fall risk factors; alarm use is driven largely by unit practices. Alarms are used too frequently and too indiscriminately, and guidance is needed for optimizing alarm use to reduce noise and encourage mobility in appropriate patients.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.