ArticleRevista latino-americana de enfermagem2026
Barriers to managing clinical alarms in intensive care units: a cross-sectional study.
Article in Revista latino-americana de enfermagem, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveto investigate the barriers to clinical alarm management according to nurses and nursing technicians and to examine characteristics of clinical alarm response in intensive care units.
methoda cross-sectional study was conducted in a hospital accredited by the Joint Commission International and the American Nurses Credentialing Center Magnet Recognition. A questionnaire was used to identify barriers to clinical alarm management and 84 hours of observation were carried out.
results92 professionals participated (33 nurses; 59 nursing technicians). The perception of inadequate nursing staffing levels was more frequent among nurses (21.2%) than among nursing technicians (3.4%; p=0.006). Competition between clinical alarms and noise from other equipment was identified as similar among nurses (20; 60.6%) and nursing technicians (35; 53.9%; p=0.981). Frequent interruptions of activities were reported by nurses (6; 18.2%) and nursing technicians (17; 28.8%) (p=0.615). Forty-nine clinical alarms were recorded, with a mean response time of 2.5 minutes (SD 2.8) and three (6.1%) were ignored.
conclusionseveral barriers to adequate management were identified, including human resources, environmental factors and work processes. Regarding care, alarms from multiparameter monitors predominated, responded to mainly by the nursing staff, with a low proportion of ignored clinical alarms.
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.