Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jul 11:12:71.
doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-12-71.

Adhoc electromagnetic compatibility testing of non-implantable medical devices and radio frequency identification

Adhoc electromagnetic compatibility testing of non-implantable medical devices and radio frequency identification

Seth J Seidman et al. Biomed Eng Online. .

Abstract

Background: The use of radiofrequency identification (RFID) in healthcare is increasing and concerns for electromagnetic compatibility (EMC) pose one of the biggest obstacles for widespread adoption. Numerous studies have documented that RFID can interfere with medical devices. The majority of past studies have concentrated on implantable medical devices such as implantable pacemakers and implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs). This study examined EMC between RFID systems and non-implantable medical devices.

Methods: Medical devices were exposed to 19 different RFID readers and one RFID active tag. The RFID systems used covered 5 different frequency bands: 125-134 kHz (low frequency (LF)); 13.56 MHz (high frequency (HF)); 433 MHz; 915 MHz (ultra high frequency (UHF])) and 2.4 GHz. We tested three syringe pumps, three infusion pumps, four automatic external defibrillators (AEDs), and one ventilator. The testing procedure is modified from American National Standards Institute (ANSI) C63.18, Recommended Practice for an On-Site, Ad Hoc Test Method for Estimating Radiated Electromagnetic Immunity of Medical Devices to Specific Radio-Frequency Transmitters.

Results: For syringe pumps, we observed electromagnetic interference (EMI) during 13 of 60 experiments (22%) at a maximum distance of 59 cm. For infusion pumps, we observed EMI during 10 of 60 experiments (17%) at a maximum distance of 136 cm. For AEDs, we observed EMI during 18 of 75 experiments (24%) at a maximum distance of 51 cm. The majority of the EMI observed was classified as probably clinically significant or left the device inoperable. No EMI was observed for all medical devices tested during exposure to 433 MHz (two readers, one active tag) or 2.4 GHz RFID (two readers).

Conclusion: Testing confirms that RFID has the ability to interfere with critical medical equipment. Hospital staff should be aware of the potential for medical device EMI caused by RFID systems and should be encouraged to perform on-site RF immunity tests prior to RFID system deployment or prior to placing new medical devices in an RFID environment. The methods presented in this paper are time-consuming and burdensome and suggest the need for standard test methods for assessing the immunity of medical devices to RFID systems.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
RFID reader orientations tested: (a) horizontal orientation; (b) vertical orientation.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Percentage of medical devices experiencing EMI for each device category at different RFID frequency ranges. LF = 134 kHz, HF = 13.56 MHz, UHF = 915 MHz. No EMI was observed at 433 MHz or 2.45 GHz. No EMI was observed for the one a ventilator tested.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Maximum distances where EMI was observed for each device category at different RFID carrier frequencies. LF = 134 kHz, HF = 13.56 MHz, UHF = 915 MHz. No EMI was observed at 433 MHz or 2.45 GHz. No EMI was observed for the one ventilator tested.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Seidman SJ, Brockman R, Lewis BM, Guag J, Shein MJ, Clement WJ, Kippola J, Digby D, Barber C, Huntwork D. In vitro tests reveal sample radiofrequency identification readers inducing clinically significant electromagnetic interference to implantable pacemakers and implantable cardioverter-defibrillators. Hear Rhythm. 2010;7:99–107. doi: 10.1016/j.hrthm.2009.09.071. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pantchenko OS, Seidman SJ, Guag JW, Witters DM Jr, Sponberg CL. Electromagnetic compatibility of implantable neurostimulators to RFID emitters. Biomed Eng Online. 2011;10:50. doi: 10.1186/1475-925X-10-50. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Van der Togt R, Van Lieshout EJ, Hensbroek R, Beinat E, Binnekade JM, Bakker PJM. Electromagnetic interference from radio frequency identification inducing potentially hazardous incidents in critical care medical equipment. Jama-J Am Med Assoc. 2008;299:2884–2890. doi: 10.1001/jama.299.24.2884. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Futatsumori S, Hikage T, Nojima T, Koike B, Fujimoto H, Toyoshima T. A Novel Assessment Methodology for the EMI Occurrence in Implantable Medical Devices Based Upon Magnetic Flux Distribution of RFID Reader/writers. Electromagnetic Compatibility, 2007 EMC 2007 IEEE International Symposium on; 9–13 July 2007. 2007. pp. 1–6.
    1. Ogirala A, Stachel JR, Mickle MH. Electromagnetic Interference of Cardiac Rhythmic Monitoring Devices to Radio Frequency Identification: Analytical Analysis and Mitigation Methodology. Inf Technol Biomed, IEEE Trans. 2011;15:848–853. - PubMed