"There needs to be a growing awareness among hospitals that problems can occur," Collins says. "And it is difficult to say if something, such as an
RFID system, will interfere with critical care equipment unless you do a study. Hospitals need to do a risk assessment of every wireless device that comes into the hospital, because [the wireless devices] all create a greater
noise level in terms of radio
frequency waves. You really don't know what to expect until they are tested."
Power coming from the RFID system, Collins says, may have more of an impact on devices than the type of frequency used—something the university's study revealed. According to the study, in fact, the number of
EMI incidents increased with higher output power of transmitting RFID systems.
Collins deems the study well conducted, praising the researchers' disclosure that they conducted a worst-case scenario by using the maximal output power of both RFID systems. "Most devices don't operate at their highest power," he explains, adding that hospitals should test any RFID system—regardless of frequency—because any frequency may or may not impact devices. "You just don't know," he says.
According to the study's authors, although the two systems utilized in the test could be considered as a representative sample of RFID equipment used for applications in health care, the testing of one RFID system on EMI in a medical device "does not implicate immunity or vulnerability to other RFID systems if based on different signal characteristics or deployments."
AeroScout, one of several vendors that supplies
Wi-Fi-based tracking technology to a number of hospitals, reports that not only are hospitals deploying Wi-Fi-enabled real-time location systems to track assets, but they are also increasingly using Wi-Fi-enabled equipment such as laptops. Executives from AeroScout claim their devices have been tested and certified as meeting regulations of the
U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and
ETSI, as well as the IEC6100/CE60601 standard that specifically defines electromagnetic
compatibility rules for operation in a health-care environment.
As for the University of Amsterdam's study, its authors recommend that anyone implementing RFID in health-care environments take additional precautions, including on-site EMI tests. They further suggest that "the intensity of electronic life-supporting medical devices in this area requires careful management of the introduction of new wireless communications such as RFID."
READERS' COMMENTS
Why even install this technology?
Isn't a barcode enough for hospitals? Why use this technology for this purpose? it seems unnecessarily cumbersome and expensive to employ and unlikely to increase efficiency.
Posted By: R. 6/25/2008 at 6:57:07 PM
http://to.swang.googlepages.com/rfid
There is a good overview of RFID. possibly a little bit aged. http://to.swang.googlepages.com/rfid something useful
Posted By: W. S 6/25/2008 at 11:13:44 PM
RFID EMI
I read that Dutch study and they did not test today’s 2 GHz units. Most medical equipment today communicate wirelessly in 802.11g (2 GHz) so if there were a problem, they would do it to them selves. Our entire hospital complex is wired with 802.11g nodes and they are not interfering. we have contacted Alaris, our pump manufacturer, and the only stipulation they gave us is not to drill any holes in the chassis. In any case, we are testing our equipment with 802.11g RFID sample units just to document that we did. So far, no problems found (yet). Mark Volkomener CBET Clinical Engineering Network Security/Video Admin. Benefis Healthcare 1101 26th St S Great Falls, Montana 59405 Phone: 406.455.4252 Fax: 406.455.4144 volkmare@benefis.org -------------
Posted By: M. Volkomener 6/26/2008 at 2:57:13 PM