This Article  • Full text  • PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on ISI (1)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Related article  • Similar articles in JAMA  Topic Collections  • Critical Care/ Intensive Care Medicine  • Adult Critical Care  • Patient Safety/ Medical Error  • Alert me on articles by topic

Remko van der Togt, MSc; Erik Jan van Lieshout, MD; Reinout Hensbroek, MSc; E. Beinat, PhD; J. M. Binnekade, PhD; P. J. M. Bakker, MD, PhD

JAMA. 2008;299(24):2884-2890.

Context  Health care applications of autoidentification technologies, such as radio frequency identification (RFID), have been proposed to improve patient safety and also the tracking and tracing of medical equipment. However, electromagnetic interference (EMI) by RFID on medical devices has never been reported.

Objective  To assess and classify incidents of EMI by RFID on critical care equipment.

Design and Setting  Without a patient being connected, EMI by 2 RFID systems (active 125 kHz and passive 868 MHz) was assessed under controlled conditions during May 2006, in the proximity of 41 medical devices (in 17 categories, 22 different manufacturers) at the Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. Assessment took place according to an international test protocol. Incidents of EMI were classified according to a critical care adverse events scale as hazardous, significant, or light.

Results  In 123 EMI tests (3 per medical device), RFID induced 34 EMI incidents: 22 were classified as hazardous, 2 as significant, and 10 as light. The passive 868-MHz RFID signal induced a higher number of incidents (26 incidents in 41 EMI tests; 63%) compared with the active 125-kHz RFID signal (8 incidents in 41 EMI tests; 20%); difference 44% (95% confidence interval, 27%-53%; P < .001). The passive 868-MHz RFID signal induced EMI in 26 medical devices, including 8 that were also affected by the active 125-kHz RFID signal (26 in 41 devices; 63%). The median distance between the RFID reader and the medical device in all EMI incidents was 30 cm (range, 0.1-600 cm).

Conclusions  In a controlled nonclinical setting, RFID induced potentially hazardous incidents in medical devices. Implementation of RFID in the critical care environment should require on-site EMI tests and updates of international standards.

Author Affiliations: Spatial Information Laboratory, Institute of Environmental Studies, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands (Mr van der Togt and Dr Beinat); Department of Intensive Care and Mobile Intensive Care Unit (Drs van Lieshout and Binnekade), Department of Clinical Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Bioinformatics (Dr Binnekade), and Department of Quality Assurance and Innovation (Dr Bakker), Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam; TNO Netherlands Organization for Applied Scientific Research, Leiden, the Netherlands (Mr Hensbroek); and Faculty of Sciences, University of Salzburg, Salzburg, Austria (Dr Beinat).

RELATED ARTICLE

Taming the Technology Beast
Donald M. Berwick
JAMA. 2008;299(24):2898-2899.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

All you need to read in the other general journals
BMJ 2008;337:a582-a582.
FULL TEXT  

Radiofrequency Identification Devices Might Cause Electromagnetic Interference
JWatch Emergency Med. 2008;2008:3-3.
FULL TEXT  

Technology and Its Unintended Consequences
Journal Watch Hospital Medicine 2008;2008:1-1.
FULL TEXT  

Taming the Technology Beast
Berwick
JAMA 2008;299:2898-2899.
FULL TEXT