Elections Today
- Pennsylvania
Recent Projections
| State | Candidate | Delegates |
|---|---|---|
 Donald Trump | ||
Pennsylvania |  Joe Biden |
Wireless Chips: a Threat to Hospital Patients?
Certain tags on medical supplies may interfere with pacemakers, other devices.
June 24, 2008— -- A type of device commonly used on tracking tags for medical supplies could cause potentially dangerous interference with critical care medical devices — including pacemakers — new research suggests.
A study published Tuesday in the Journal of the American Medical Association finds that radio frequency identification (RFID) tags, which are often used to track medical supplies and devices, may interfere with the functioning of some medical devices and could potentially cause serious harm to a patient utilizing a critical care device.
This study highlights the dangers that can be associated with otherwise beneficial technological developments, says study author Dr. Donald Berwick, professor in the Department of Health Policy and Management at Harvard University's School of Public Health.
"The study highlights the fact that we really need our healthcare system to understand technologies are always double-edged," Berwick explained. "They can bring benefit but usually also have concurrent hazards, so we need to be sophisticated and wise about these technologies and how we use them."
The RFID tags used to track medical supplies are similar to the security tags attached to clothing in stores, or those used for security access cards. The tags generate signals with radio frequencies to "communicate" with one another.
Researchers at Vrije University in Amsterdam tested 41 critical care medical devices, including pacemakers, ventilators, IV pumps and anesthesia machines, among others. They moved three types of RFID tags from two different manufacturers around each device at different distances to detect the point at which the machine malfunctioned, if at all.
Out of 123 tests, they detected 34 instances in which interference had occurred. After an interference issue was detected, the researchers asked five intensive care doctors to qualify the interferences as minor, moderate, or severely hazardous to a patient who might be using the machine.
Of the 34 interference issues identified, the independent panel of intensive care doctors classified 22 of the interferences as hazardous.
