The customer care solution center representative verified the issue with the customer over the phone.The customer care solution center representative dispatched a field service engineer, on site to troubleshoot the cause of the issue, as well as test the device in question and obtain logs from the central station.The sequence of events was provided by a philips clinical specialist who worked with the customer remotely regarding this issue.The patient was a known patient at the hospital who was admitted to the orthopedic floor (5th floor) and placed on an mx40 device (room 502) connected to a pic ix central station.The patient was transported for a ct scan via wheelchair, still on the mx40 device.The patient returned from ct scan when the monitor technician indicated that they could not assign the mx40 device to a sector at the pic ix.The customer placed the patient on another mx40 device and assigned it to room #348 (which was monitoring another patient) on a classic pic system but didn't admit the patient.The patient suffered a seizure, coded and was then transferred to the icu.When the cs attempted to find the information in the system, she was unable to find the patient listed in the history.There were no strips available for this event.She confirmed that the patient was discharged without saving the data.The mx40 devices have both been put back into service, without testing of the devices.Logs were sent to a sw engineer, who could not confirm any disconnects during the timeframe in question.He did notice that some devices were having issues connecting to the central station between 2pm and 8pm and the device associated with room 502 had more disconnections that some of the other devices.Onsite evaluation of signal strength for the device in use with room 502 found the signal strength was within specification without any indications of a signal problem.The customer reported that they received a "choppy" waveform on the central station for some time before a patient monitored on an mx40 expired.The customer informed the field service engineer, that the involved devices in question were returned to service immediately after the incident.No reproducible problem with signal strength was identified during onsite evaluation of the original mx40 device.Logs were inconclusive regarding any connectivity problems and did not contain all required information for a complete evaluation of the event as the patient was not admitted at the 2nd information center device.The information available for this report/service event is not sufficient to determine a specific cause.
|