Interference by new-generation mobile phones on critical care medical equipment

IntroductionThe aim of the study was to assess and classify incidents of electromagnetic interference (EMI) by second-generation and third-generation mobile phones on critical care medical equipment.MethodsEMI was assessed with two General Packet Radio Service (GPRS) signals (900 MHz, 2 W, two different time-slot occupations) and one Universal Mobile Telecommunications System (UMTS) signal (1,947.2 MHz, 0.2 W), corresponding to maximal transmit performance of mobile phones in daily practice, generated under controlled conditions in the proximity of 61 medical devices. Incidents of EMI were classified in accordance with an adjusted critical care event scale.ResultsA total of 61 medical devices in 17 categories (27 different manufacturers) were tested and demonstrated 48 incidents in 26 devices (43%); 16 (33%) were classified as hazardous, 20 (42%) as significant and 12 (25%) as light. The GPRS-1 signal induced the most EMI incidents (41%), the GRPS-2 signal induced fewer (25%) and the UMTS signal induced the least (13%; P < 0.001). The median distance between antenna and medical device for EMI incidents was 3 cm (range 0.1 to 500 cm). One hazardous incident occurred beyond 100 cm (in a ventilator with GRPS-1 signal at 300 cm).ConclusionCritical care equipment is vulnerable to EMI by new-generation wireless telecommunication technologies with median distances of about 3 cm. The policy to keep mobile phones '1 meter' from the critical care bedside in combination with easily accessed areas of unrestricted use still seems warranted.

[1]  Nathan Lawrentschuk,et al.  Mobile phone interference with medical equipment and its clinical relevance: a systematic review , 2004, The Medical journal of Australia.

[2]  Adam Burgess,et al.  Use of mobile phones in hospitals , 2006, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[3]  R Tobisch,et al.  Mobile phones in hospitals. , 1999, Biomedical instrumentation & technology.

[4]  Mats K. E. B. Wallin,et al.  Modern Wireless Telecommunication Technologies and Their Electromagnetic Compatibility with Life-Supporting Equipment , 2005, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[5]  K. Nelson,et al.  Developing a comprehensive electronic adverse event reporting system in an academic health center. , 2002, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[6]  Julian M Goldman,et al.  Communication in Critical Care Environments: Mobile Telephones Improve Patient Care , 2006, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[7]  M Feychting,et al.  Output power levels from mobile phones in different geographical areas; implications for exposure assessment , 2004, Occupational and Environmental Medicine.

[8]  Anthony C Easty,et al.  Electromagnetic interference in critical care. , 2006, Journal of critical care.

[9]  Martin McKee,et al.  Evidence-based policy? The use of mobile phones in hospital. , 2006, Journal of public health.

[10]  Robert M. Kacmarek,et al.  Cellular phone interference with the operation of mechanical ventilators* , 2004, Critical care medicine.

[11]  David L Hayes,et al.  Use of cellular telephones in the hospital environment. , 2007, Mayo Clinic proceedings.

[12]  Michael Imhoff,et al.  Everybody on the phone? , 2006, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[13]  V Barbaro,et al.  Electromagnetic interference by GSM cellular phones and UHF radios with intensive-care and operating-room ventilators. , 2000, Biomedical instrumentation & technology.

[14]  Lewis S. Nelson,et al.  Cellular phone interference as a cause of acute epinephrine poisoning. , 2005, Annals of emergency medicine.

[15]  Wireless communication devices and electromagnetic interference. ECRI's updated recommendations. , 2001, Health devices.