Don't have an account?
By Whitney Lloyd, MBA, BSN, RN, Care Alliance Managing Director, GE HealthCare
When technology, workflows, staffing models, escalation protocols and governance evolve separately, clinicians become the integration layer.
I remember not just the sound of alarms, but the mental load that came with each one.
Is this artifact? Has the patient changed? Who else heard it? Who is closer? What else is happening right now?
A patient alarm is never just a sound. It is a question the system asks clinicians to answer in real time. Thousands of times a day.
That is not hyperbole. In a study of 65 million monitor alarms, a single intensive care unit generated more than 1,000 an hour at full occupancy—nearly nine in 10 of them technical rather than physiologic1
That is the hidden burden. Clinicians are asked to reconcile the monitor, the workflow, the unit staffing reality, the escalation path, the documentation expectation and the patient’s condition in the moment. The more disconnected those elements are, the more transformation depends on individual vigilance rather than system design.
Alarm fatigue is a revealing way to see how well a health system turns information into coordinated action. Decisions made across technology, operations, staffing, workflow design and governance either compound the burden on care teams or make care easier to deliver.
Patient monitoring makes this visible because it is no longer confined to one unit or one device. Across critical care, step-down, medical-surgical units, perioperative areas, centralized monitoring teams and mobile workflows, monitoring shapes how teams identify deterioration, escalate care, document changes and maintain visibility as patients move through the system.
As monitoring becomes more connected and continuous, the enterprise challenge is not how to generate more data. It is how to make the right signal actionable for the right person at the right time.
Alarm management is one tangible example. A monitor may detect a change, but the system determines what happens next.
Is the alarm clinically meaningful? Is it routed to the right role? Does the care team trust it? Is the workflow clear when the primary clinician is unavailable? Are parameters adjusted as the patient’s condition changes? Are leaders reviewing performance and improving the process over time?
Those questions are not only clinical. They are operational, digital, workforce and governance questions, and they sit at the intersection of the enterprise. They also depend on infrastructure: whether devices, records and alerting systems are integrated well enough that the signal arrives intact, and whether clinical and digital leaders share ownership of what happens when it does.
The same pattern shows up across transformation efforts:
The enterprise question is the same each time: have we designed the full path from signal to action?
This is where people, processes and technology matter, because care teams experience them as one system. Technology can add complexity on its own, but the greater burden usually comes when technology, workflows and operational priorities evolve separately instead of together.
In my earlier piece on strategy at the point-of-care, I wrote that every enterprise decision eventually reaches the bedside. Alarm management shows what happens when it gets there. The technology may detect a change, but people and processes determine whether that signal becomes timely, confident action.
Enterprise transformation is about designing systems where people, processes and technology work together so the people delivering care can do what they do best: care for patients.

Care teams should not have to serve as the integration layer between disconnected technology, workflows, staffing models and governance.
See how Care Alliance helps health systems support them through workflows, governance and technology that have been designed together around the moment of care.

For health system leadership, that means asking a different set of questions before, during and after implementation:
These questions, and what comes next, matter most when conditions shift. Teams have to be able to rely on the system to help them act with confidence as the environment shifts, staffing changes and patient acuity rises.
Clinicians should not have to serve as the connective tissue between disconnected systems. Their judgment should be supported by workflows, governance and technology designed together around the moment of care.
That is why alarm management is such a useful lens. It compresses the broader challenge into one familiar moment: a signal occurs, the system responds and a clinician decides what to do next.
When that path is unclear, clinicians work to close the gap. When it is designed well, the system helps them focus on the patient.
Enterprise transformation becomes tangible when the right signal reaches the right person with the right context and the next action is clear.
That is the work ahead for health systems pursuing transformation at scale: not asking clinicians to integrate around the system, but designing the system to integrate with clinicians.
To learn more about how Care Alliances can support and accelerate enterprise alignment, explore Care Alliances here.
Continue your reading:
1. Karina Kraevsky, Sajida Aqtash, Fanurs Chi-En Teh, Michael R. Pinsky, Gilles Clermont, Marilyn Hravnak, and Salah S. Al-Zaiti, “A Comprehensive Cross-Sectional Study of Bedside Monitor Alarm Characteristics and Alarm Load across Hospital Units,” Scientific Reports 16 (2026): 13274, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-026-43028-3.