Now, Mobile Phones Are Good For Hospitals

from the machine-that-goes-bing dept

Fri, Jan 27th 2006 4:21pm — Carlo Longino

Earlier in the week, a story came out of Singapore about a hospital that was allowing its staff to carry mobile phones after tests showed they had no impact on medical equipment. Many hospitals have held to their bans on phones in fear they'll interfere with equipment, but another new study says there's actually a big benefit in letting people use them (via Textually). Researchers at Yale have found that the use of cell phones in hospitals reduces their error rates since it allows for more timely communications -- and the incidence of interference is lower than the incidence of error caused by delayed communication. Looks like that long-held ban might be hurting things more than it helps.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

38 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

dorpus, 27 Jan 2006 @ 4:38pm

Is there a treatment for deafness?
After the last thread where half a dozen health professionals had said mobile phones are harmful, and gave real life examples, ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Thomas, 27 Jan 2006 @ 5:38pm
  
  Re: Is there a treatment for deafness?
  From the article: He said the reported 2.4 percent prevalence of electronic interference with life support devices such as ventilators, intravenous infusion pumps, and monitoring equipment is much lower than the 14.9 percent risk of observed medical error or injury due to a delay in communication.
  
  It's not saying there's no interference, just that the communication benefits provided by cell phones produced more positive patient outcomes than the risk of cell phone interference with medical equipment.
  The examples you refer to are anecdotal.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jan 2006 @ 5:58pm

In other news, cell phones save lives when...
old people fall down, car crashes, Uncle Bob ate one two many grease burgers and had a heart attack...

Of course the interference would be negligible enough to not matter to equipment - its not a high power signal like your microwave oven (aka: the microwave) uses to fry food.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ted Smith, 29 Jan 2006 @ 12:59pm
  
  Wireless World: Enormous innovation, but big chall
  A record number of mobile phones were shipped last year, and analysts and investors are now saying that the promises made 10 years ago about the potential for the wireless economy are truly being realized. Still, some of the foremost investors and analysts tell United Press International's Wireless World that they are nervous that the United States may not maintain its competitive edge in the global information economy unless certain changes are made -- by federal policymakers and business leaders -- soon.
  
  "There is enormous innovation in our economy -- no doubt," said James Melcher, founder of the New York City-based hedge fund, Balestra Capital Management, in an interview with Wireless World. "It's incredible. But there are problems. Why are countries with only 40 percent of the world's population (e.g., China) graduating ten times as many engineers and scientists as we are? Why are our schools pumping out so many lawyers? There is no value-added in legal work." By Gene Koprowski
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pat, 27 Jan 2006 @ 7:23pm

They do it here in Japan...
My wife is pregnant. We live in Japan and go to a specialty women's clinic. Just yesterday we went for a check-up (she's 8.5 months now) and while my wife wife was hooked to a monitering device detecting contractions and the baby's heartbeat.

Then nurses' cell phone rang. She was needed upstairs for a birth. The other nurse was in the delivery room on her cell phone.

I didn't notice any funky readings on any of the equipment...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Andrew Strasser, 27 Jan 2006 @ 9:53pm
  
  Re: They do it here in Japan...
  Rf causes cancer...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ryan Ahlborn, 28 Jan 2006 @ 6:06am
    
    Re: They do it here in Japan...
    water causes cancer...
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - W Decker, 28 Jan 2006 @ 9:25am
      
      Re: They do it here in Japan...
      First off, even bananas cause cancer. Anything that has a chemical reaction releases some small amount of particle decay (radiation). Secondly, cellular phones have been safe to opperate in medical facilities for at least the last 5 years. As a matter of fact, 6 of the major hospitals in the Washington DC area are going to the Treos to use for communication.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Daniel, 29 Jan 2006 @ 9:39pm
        
        Re: They do it here in Japan...
        Sorry to break it do you, but chemical reactions do NOT cause nuclear decay...however, bananas do contain high levels of potassium, and there are quite a few isotopes of potassium that are unstable, and undergo nuclear decay on thier own, having nothing to do with a chemical reaction.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Mary, 4 Apr 2007 @ 3:06pm
      
      Re: Re: They do it here in Japan...
      by Ryan Ahlborn...tell me Ryan, more about yourself!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Okita Soji, 28 Jan 2006 @ 1:59pm
    
    Re: They do it here in Japan...
    No one knows what causes cancer...if rf caused cancer, we'd all have it.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2006 @ 7:14pm
    
    Re: They do it here in Japan...
    Andrew, I hate to break it to you, but everything causes cancer. Stop worrying and enjoy life. If you worry about getting cancer all the time, then you will never have any fun and will still die of the same things as the rest of us. Life is short. enjoy it.
    
    about the only Cell phones I know of that may come close to interfearing are iDen network phones (Nextel, SouthernLinc) and the ones I used in the military for secure communications. They both use an odd method of side banding that causes issues for some of my gear at home.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
dorpus, 27 Jan 2006 @ 10:20pm

Why Yale is a laughingstock
Despite the overall reputation of the school, Yale's biostatistics capabilities are quite poor. This anesthesiologist-led study is no exception, making a laughable statement that "2.4 percent prevalence of electronic interference with life support devices such as ventilators, intravenous infusion pumps, and monitoring equipment is much lower than the 14.9 percent risk of observed medical error or injury due to a delay in communication." How many of these medical errors occur because the health care professionals are distracted by cell phones? How many delays in communication occur because cell phones interfere with communications, 2.4% of the time? I would want to see loglinear models, odds ratios, autocorrelation adjustments, residual analyses, matched case-control setups.

[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Bubba Nicholson (profile), 27 Jan 2006 @ 11:41pm
  
  Biostatistics are obviated.
  Yale is certainly no laughingstock. Biostatistics are unnecessary for managerial analysis. The last ICU monitors that used anything close to cell phone frequencies were made in the fifties. None continue in use in 2006. Even the ghetto and Indian reservation hospitals have worn them out, finally.
  Pagers are universal in American hospitals, nobody cares about pager emf.
  Quiet zones like reading rooms, movie theaters, and some hospital areas may still ban non-staff cell phones ringers and/or conversations, something that can be accomplished electronically, to further healing. Hospital telephones are fomites, anyway, and would reduce nosicomial illness and save lives if they were reduced or eliminated.
  Physicians spend entirely too much time tracking each other down playing pager tag. Twenty minute delays are common, as are non-contacts altogether. Cell phones have decent screens now, and the cameras are getting better, too. These, along with computers, are useful tools that physicians should make use of. Even today, most patient charts are hand-written merely to frustrate the ambulance chasers. Cellular transmission of encrypted patient data among physicians would extend the benefit of medical expertise, decrease costs & physician distress, and improve patient care.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Posterlogo, 28 Jan 2006 @ 2:51pm
  
  Re: Why Yale is a laughingstock
  Read the original journal article instead of just the news report, jackass. Using big words doesn't give you the capability to judge a study like this without looking at it a little more carefully. The study states simply that comparing the error rates, one would simply need to achieve a decrease in comm delay error of 2.4% below the existing 14.9% to justify allowing cell phones. The study suggests that the next step is infact to guage exactly that. First they identify the two error rates, and then setup for a study to determine if the comm delay error rate can indeed be reduced by allowing cell phones, to a level that would absorb the errors caused by cell phones, or more. Also, no need to insult Yale in general just because you personally didn't like one researcher's study. What next, you gonna say "stupid american university system is a laughing stock?" Less ranting, more thinking please. And at least a little more respect.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- srgtick, 28 Jan 2006 @ 2:54pm
  
  Re: Why Yale is a laughingstock
  Of course no one but you would have thought of those variables. My god you are a genius.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Panaqqa, 27 Jan 2006 @ 10:53pm

The real truth...
Actually, it has been known for a long time that cellphones operate on the wrong frequencies and at too low a power level to cause any interference with medical equipment at all. The real reason hospitals banned cellphones and continue to do so? Banks of payphones for visitors and horribly overpriced room phones for patients are significant profit centers. You don't see any demands that police and paramedics turn off their RF equipment in the hospital do you? And those persons are usually around the emergency department, where there is a high concentration of hi tech equipment in the trauma room, etc. The only interference cellphones might cause in hospitals is with the bottom line.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- SMG, 27 Jan 2006 @ 11:35pm
  
  Re: The real truth...
  i work in a hospital. since i got a cell about 6 years ago, i have always carried my cell. i x-ray people in ICU, ER, they bring critical patients to cat scan on vents and wireless ekg monitors.
  not ever even one time has anyone said "someone has a cellphone on!"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - hautedawg, 28 Jan 2006 @ 5:48am
    
    Re: The real truth...
    I was the victim of improper emergency medical treatment which left me a quadriplegic. It was not due to cell phones, microwaves or any other technical device. The real danger in hospitals is the arrogant doctor who is busy talking to his broker, wife, mistress or attorney and NOT paying attention to the patient. In my case, 4 shattered vertabrae where diagnosed as a torn muscle. Give me a cell phone and let me call a REAL physician.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2006 @ 12:28pm
    
    Re: The real truth...
    Totally correct. The biggest issue is DAMAGE. The hospitals DO NOT want to be liable for eqipment that can possibly be damaged by machines operating inside the hospital.
    
    IN alot of cases now I've heard that newer microwave don't even effect medical devices like the used to either.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Joe, 27 Jan 2006 @ 11:37pm

No Subject Given
Actually most medical equipment that I work on is not effected by rf interference. That equipment includes, feeding pumps, thermometry units, and ventalator boards (we make the boards only). Most of the pulse oxymetry boards we make will also be fine around cell phones, except the newest low power boards that are designed to be battery operated. Those will be fine once they are inside the unit. Cell phones are not supposed to be on the production floor, but engineering and other people have them on all the time and there are no known problems.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
m0u5y, 28 Jan 2006 @ 5:10pm

No Subject Given
Well, might might all very well have cancer.. or at least cancerous cells, infact if I'm not mistaken we all do, it just depends on how the body is able to fight it off the naturally occuring ones and if pathogens such as viruses and strong enough radiation is present... many people will get cancer and can't prevent it, just cure it and since the radiation from cellphones is no better or worse than the crap you get off this monitor you're staring at and the wireless and the billions of radiation sources which litter everyday life... if we worried about that we would be living in the stoneage. cellphones are very helpful and i believe that some hardheads wouldn't be able to affect progress because of some archaic beleif.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2006 @ 6:52pm

No Subject Given
Well duh cell phones don't interfere with medical equipment cause if it did it would interfere with all electronic devices, which it dosen't. Only Electromagnetic waves can effect electronic devies thats why solar flares are so dangerous. The 2% of the times that something did happen are insignificant and probably can be atrubitted to ather factors. As for the radation you are bombarded with so much radation a day. i believe the amount the Earth alone puts off is something like 300 million tons a day and that dosen't count cosmic radation. Any radation the a cell phone puts off is insignifigant.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- WHO?, 28 Jan 2006 @ 11:23pm
  
  Re: No Subject Given
  Well duh cell phones don't interfere with medical equipment cause if it did it would interfere with all electronic devices, which it dosen't. Only Electromagnetic waves can effect electronic devies thats why solar flares are so dangerous.
  
  You should understand the tech before you make a claim such as this...The fequency emitted by a cellphone is too small to register but IT DOESCAUSE CLOSE RANGE INTERFERNCE. I am a media specialist and know for a fact that it does, you can try this at home as well. Go stand next to an analog sound source unsheiled, like the input line to your computer speakers. Your computer speakers will amplify the signal and cause annoying interferance. This happends when you either on a call or the phone is looking for a signal.
  Now about the cancer stuff, you need a ton of power (voltage) to affect the human body and the proper frequencies, actually millions of volts at very high frequencies. low frequencies won't hurt you but they can make certain objects levitate. You can see these studies by searching for the philidelphia project and the Nazi Bell project.
  
  oh and I appologize for spelling and grammer...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Get your facts straight, 29 Jan 2006 @ 10:30am
    
    Re: No Subject Given
    >> You should understand the tech before you make a claim such as this... > I am a media specialist > Go stand next to an analog sound source unsheiled, like the input line to your computer speakers. Your computer speakers will amplify the signal and cause annoying interferance. > you need a ton of power (voltage) to affect the human body > actually millions of volts at very high frequencies> oh and I appologize for spelling and grammer... <<
    
    Yeah, now about your lack of understanding the tech before you make a claim. Hmmm.
    
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 29 Jan 2006 @ 10:34am
    
    Re: No Subject Given
    - You should understand the tech before you make a claim such as this... Yes, YOU should! - I am a media specialist What does that qualify you for? - Go stand next to an analog sound source unsheiled, like the input line to your computer speakers. Your computer speakers will amplify the signal and cause annoying interferance. There is s big difference between reception and interference. A well designed device will receive many RF signals and will be designed to reject the interference. Cell phones have been around long enough that device manufactures know how to deal with their RF. If there is a problem then the device should be fixed. - you need a ton of power (voltage) to affect the human body Power actually measured in watts. It's the amperage that is dangerous in a human body. High volts or low volts don't matter. It's the amps that kill you. - actually millions of volts at very high frequencies Millions is an exaggeration. Your 120 volt at 60 hz electrical in your house can kill you. A 12 volt battery with enough amperage in the wrong place on your body can kill you. - oh and I appologize for spelling and grammer... Yeah, now about your lack of understanding the tech before you make a claim. Hmmm.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 29 Jan 2006 @ 10:35am
    
    Re: No Subject Given
    - You should understand the tech before you make a claim such as this...
    
    Yes, YOU should!
    
    - I am a media specialist
    
    What does that qualify you for?
    
    - Go stand next to an analog sound source unsheiled, like the input line to your computer speakers. Your computer speakers will amplify the signal and cause annoying interferance.
    
    There is s big difference between reception and interference. A well designed device will receive many RF signals and will be designed to reject the interference. Cell phones have been around long enough that device manufactures know how to deal with their RF. If there is a problem then the device should be fixed.
    
    - you need a ton of power (voltage) to affect the human body
    
    Power actually measured in watts. It's the amperage that is dangerous in a human body. High volts or low volts don't matter. It's the amps that kill you.
    
    - actually millions of volts at very high frequencies
    
    Millions is an exaggeration. Your 120 volt at 60 hz electrical in your house can kill you. A 12 volt battery with enough amperage in the wrong place on your body can kill you.
    
    - oh and I appologize for spelling and grammer...
    
    Yeah, now about your lack of understanding the tech before you make a claim. Hmmm.
    
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Andrew Strasser, 29 Jan 2006 @ 12:28pm
      
      Re: No Subject Given
      I see people everyday with their cell phones attached to their heads all day long. Now mind you a study was done about this by the guy what his name again... Oh yeah "Can you hear me now?"... Basically I am just saying there are safer alternatives than this and pointing that out in a thread where obviously people are overlooking this for it's luxury. There are ways of lessening this rf directly into the side of your head, but hey it doesn't take a brain surgeon to perform a lobectomy does it?
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - WHO?, 29 Jan 2006 @ 8:19pm
      
      Re: No Subject Given
      -There is s big difference between reception and interference
      Not really, interferance is unwanted recpetion.
      -Power actually measured in watts. It's the amperage that is dangerous in a human body. High volts or low volts don't matter. It's the amps that kill you.
      Ok so let me be more specific then, You need high voltage low amperage. And Voltage does matter, high enough voltage will cause the bodyfluids to ionize and allow the current levels to rise.
      -Power actually measured in watts. It's the amperage that is dangerous in a human body. High volts or low volts don't matter. It's the amps that kill you.
      IF you actually read more around that quote then you'd relize i was talking about voltage needed for an electromagnetic device to cause harm.
      - actually millions of volts at very high frequencies
      
      You defanantly show a basic knowledge in electronics but you should work on those reading skills and not take a portion of the quote, unless you want o be like many misguided reporters...
      and once again
      - oh and I appologize for spelling and grammer...
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Dave, 29 Jan 2006 @ 9:30pm
        
        Cell Phones in Hospitals
        I am a nurse in intensive care. Yesterday one of our patients was using his cell phone even after being told not to. He was hooked up to a LifePak 5 for prep to IVP in CT room. The monitor showed aberrant PR intervals exacerbated by a bundle branch block inferiorly. The longer he was exposed to the RF frequency from the cell phone the worse the monitor showing, finally dropping down to 16 BPM. As soon as we confiscated the cell phone the heart rate increased into a steady rhythm with eupnea. The LifePak 5 showed no aberrent sequelae after the Nokia was taken into a safe area that dissipated the radio waves from it. Our hospital has decided to ban any and all cellular phones and visitors are regularly checked for them because of this unfortunate accident.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- ESD, 29 Jan 2006 @ 1:31pm
  
  Think for a second...
  Doesn't anyone realize that there are cell phone signals, radio transmissions, tv transmissions, and every other type of radiation in a hospital and every other place on earth, whether or not there are cell phones around? In order for a cell phone to work, you need transmissions from the tower as well as the phone. If they think cell phones are a threat to equipment, they better ban all radios, televisions, WIFI in the hallways for equipment and computers, and they better put radio wave absorbing panelling in 100% of the walls so no external transmissions can enter the building and disrupt equipment.
  I also think that a Junior Mint should be placed in every single surgical cut and wound to prevent infections.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - WHO?, 29 Jan 2006 @ 8:24pm
    
    Re: Think for a second...
    You forgot high voltage AC power lines.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Bobby, 29 Jan 2006 @ 8:59pm
      
      Re: Think for a second...
      get a life. take five minuts away from the god damn computer
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
lizard, 29 Jan 2006 @ 10:55pm

last time i was in the e.r...
the lady in the bed next to me apparently had unlimited night and weekend minutes. she was there with her mother who had had a heart episode, so she was feeling a little bored i guess, and for the three hours i was there, she yakked on her phone to everyone she knew -- old boyfriends, you name it.

i kept waiting for them to come take her phone away, but no.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
medical software systems, 21 Jun 2007 @ 10:45am

medical hospitol communication
...little or no impact on equipment, better communication between medical staff and doctors.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 8 Oct 2007 @ 1:32am

great good on you
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
brenda, 8 Oct 2007 @ 1:39am

thats wonderful
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jodiie, 22 Nov 2007 @ 1:31am

mobile phones
my mobile is my life (y)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]