Moderator: Kiran, if you can object to my message, then  why is this message 
not objected to? Surely, you need to be fair with all members.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Vikas Kapoor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Access India" <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, March 11, 2007 4:51 PM
Subject: [AI] Cell phone calls have no negative impact on hospital devices


> Cell phone calls have no negative impact on hospital devices
>
> New York, March 11. (PTI): Calls made on cell phones have no negative 
> impact on hospital medical devices, a study has said, dispelling the 
> long-held notion
> that they are unsafe to use in health care facilities.
>
> But other devices like CD players and anti-theft devices fitted in stores 
> could interfere in the functioning of the medical devices.
>
> In a study published in the March issue of Mayo Clinic Proceedings, 
> researchers say normal use of cell phones results in no noticeable 
> interference with
> patient care equipment.
>
> Three hundred tests were performed over a five-month period in 2006, 
> without a single problem incurred, they add.
>
> Involved in the study were two cellular phones, which used different 
> technologies from different carriers and 192 medical devices. Tests were 
> performed
> at Mayo Clinic campus in Rochester.
>
> The study's authors say the findings should prompt hospitals to alter or 
> abandon their bans on cell phone use. Mayo Clinic leaders are reviewing 
> the facility's
> cell phone ban because of the study's findings, says David Hayes of the 
> Division of Cardiovascular Diseases and a study author.
>
> Cell phone bans inconvenience patients and their families who must exit 
> hospitals to place calls, the study's authors say.
>
> The latest study revisits two earlier studies that were done 'in vitro' 
> (that is the equipment wasn't connected to the patients), which also found 
> minimal
> interaction from cell phones used in health care facilities.
>
> Hayes says, the latest study bolsters the notion that cells phones are 
> safe to use in hospitals.
>
> Two other pieces in the March issue of the journal also address whether 
> technological devices interfere with patient care equipment.
>
> Unlike the cellular phone study, the other reports detail technological 
> devices that caused patient care equipment to malfunction.
>
> A letter to the editor published in the journal details the first known 
> case of a portable CD player causing an abnormal electrocardiographic 
> (ECG) recording
> within a hospital setting. The recording returned to normal when the CD 
> player, which the patient was holding close to the ECG lead, was turned 
> off.
>
> Technology also can threaten implantable rhythm devices such as pacemakers 
> and defibrillators outside the hospital setting, the journal said.
>
> The report outlines two cases of retail stores' anti-theft devices causing 
> people's heart devices to malfunction.
>
> The anti-theft devices are commonly placed near store exits and entrances, 
> triggering an alarm if customers leave with merchandise that was not 
> purchased.
> In two instances in Tennessee, customers with a pacemaker and an 
> implantable cardiac defibrillator experienced adverse reactions after 
> nearing anti-theft
> devices.
>
> The devices triggered the adverse reactions, sending both patients to 
> emergency rooms for evaluation. The report's authors recommend that the 
> anti-theft
> devices be placed in areas of stores where customers won't linger -- away 
> from vending machines or displays of sale merchandise, for instance -- to 
> help
> avoid future episodes.
>
> Store employees also should be trained to move a customer who has 
> collapsed near an anti-theft device when medically advisable, says J Rod 
> Gimbel, MD, of
> East Tennessee Heart Consultants, and an author of the report. If they 
> aren't moved, they could experience recurring life-threatening malfunction 
> to their
> implantable device, as did one patient who was described in the report.
>
> "Simply moving the person away from the anti-theft device may save their 
> life," Gimbel says.
>
> Though Gimbel's report outlines only two cases of anti-theft devices 
> causing implantable heart devices to malfunction, he asserts that similar 
> instances
> are likely underreported, qualifying the problem as a potentially 
> widespread public safety issue.
>
> "Many times with public safety issues we wait until something bad occurs 
> before we act," Gimbel says. "Here's an opportunity where we can make our 
> knowledge
> public and head off future problems."
>
> In an accompanying editorial, John Abenstein, of Mayo Clinic's Department 
> of Anesthesiology, addresses the journal reports relating to the impact of 
> technological
> devices on patient care equipment.
>
> Abenstein says, the risk of some technological devices upsetting the 
> function of patient care equipment in hospitals appears to be small. The 
> Food and Drug
> Administration (FDA) should take a more explicit stand on the matter, he 
> says, so that health care facility policies can be altered when 
> appropriate.
>
> http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/008200703110310.htm
>
> Vikas Kapoor,
> MSN ID:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Yahoo ID:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Skype ID: dl_vikas
> Mobile: (+91) 9891098137.
> To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> with the subject unsubscribe.
>
> To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, 
> please visit the list home page at
>  http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in 


To unsubscribe send a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the subject unsubscribe.

To change your subscription to digest mode or make any other changes, please 
visit the list home page at
  http://accessindia.org.in/mailman/listinfo/accessindia_accessindia.org.in

Reply via email to