Dataset Information

Prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors in clinical wards: A two-centre prospective observational study.

ABSTRACT:

Aims and objectives

To identify the prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors (MAEs).

Background

Insight into determinants of MAEs is necessary to identify interventions to prevent MAEs.

Design

A prospective observational study in two Dutch hospitals, a university and teaching hospital.

Methods

Data were collected by observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of administrations with one or more MAEs. Secondary outcomes were the type, severity and determinants of MAEs. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used for determinant analysis. Reporting adheres to the STROBE guideline.

Results

MAEs occurred in 352 of 2576 medication administrations (13.7%). Of all MAEs (n = 380), the most prevalent types were omission (n = 87) and wrong medication handling (n = 75). Forty-five MAEs (11.8%) were potentially harmful. The pharmaceutical forms oral liquid (odds ratio [OR] 3.22, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.43-7.25), infusion (OR 1.73, CI 1.02-2.94), injection (OR 3.52, CI 2.00-6.21), ointment (OR 10.78, CI 2.10-55.26), suppository/enema (OR 6.39, CI 1.13-36.03) and miscellaneous (OR 6.17, CI 1.90-20.04) were more prone to MAEs compared to oral solid. MAEs were more likely to occur when medication was administered between 10 a.m.-2 p.m. (OR 1.91, CI 1.06-3.46) and 6 p.m.-7 a.m. (OR 1.88, CI 1.00-3.52) compared to 7 a.m.-10 a.m. and when administered by staff with higher professional education compared to staff with secondary vocational education (OR 1.68, CI 1.03-2.74). MAEs were less likely to occur in the teaching hospital (OR 0.17, CI 0.08-0.33). Day of the week, patient-to-nurse ratio, interruptions and other nurse characteristics (degree, experience, employment type) were not associated with MAEs.

Conclusions

This study identified a high MAE prevalence. Identified determinants suggest that focusing interventions on complex pharmaceutical forms and error-prone administration times may contribute to MAE reduction.

Relevance to clinical practice

The findings of this study can be used to develop targeted interventions to improve patient safety.

SUBMITTER: Jessurun JG

PROVIDER: S-EPMC10286768 | biostudies-literature | 2023 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors in clinical wards: A two-centre prospective observational study.

Jessurun Janique Gabriëlle JG Hunfeld Nicole Geertruida Maria NGM de Roo Michelle M van Onzenoort Hein Antonius Walterus HAW van Rosmalen Joost J van Dijk Monique M van den Bemt Patricia Maria Lucia Adriana PMLA

Journal of clinical nursing 20220123 1-2

<h4>Aims and objectives</h4>To identify the prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors (MAEs).<h4>Background</h4>Insight into determinants of MAEs is necessary to identify interventions to prevent MAEs.<h4>Design</h4>A prospective observational study in two Dutch hospitals, a university and teaching hospital.<h4>Methods</h4>Data were collected by observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of administrations with one or more MAEs. Secondary outcomes were the type, se ...[more]

PMID: 35068001

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo improve neonatal patient safety through automated detection of medication administration errors (MAEs) in high alert medications including narcotics, vasoactive medication, intravenous fluids, parenteral nutrition, and insulin using the electronic health record (EHR); to evaluate rates of MAEs in neonatal care; and to compare the performance of computerized algorithms to traditional incident reporting for error detection.MethodsWe developed novel computerized algorithms to identify MAEs within the EHR of all neonatal patients treated in a level four neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in 2011 and 2012. We evaluated the rates and types of MAEs identified by the automated algorithms and compared their performance to incident reporting. Performance was evaluated by physician chart review.ResultsIn the combined 2011 and 2012 NICU data sets, the automated algorithms identified MAEs at the following rates: fentanyl, 0.4% (4 errors/1005 fentanyl administration records); morphine, 0.3% (11/4009); dobutamine, 0 (0/10); and milrinone, 0.3% (5/1925). We found higher MAE rates for other vasoactive medications including: dopamine, 11.6% (5/43); epinephrine, 10.0% (289/2890); and vasopressin, 12.8% (54/421). Fluid administration error rates were similar: intravenous fluids, 3.2% (273/8567); parenteral nutrition, 3.2% (649/20124); and lipid administration, 1.3% (203/15227). We also found 13 insulin administration errors with a resulting rate of 2.9% (13/456). MAE rates were higher for medications that were adjusted frequently and fluids administered concurrently. The algorithms identified many previously unidentified errors, demonstrating significantly better sensitivity (82% vs. 5%) and precision (70% vs. 50%) than incident reporting for error recognition.ConclusionsAutomated detection of medication administration errors through the EHR is feasible and performs better than currently used incident reporting systems. Automated algorithms may be useful for real-time error identification and mitigation.

Project description:BackgroundOlder people in long-term residential care are at increased risk of medication prescribing and administration errors. The main aim of this study was to measure the incidence of medication administration errors in nursing and residential homes using a barcode medication administration (BCMA) system.MethodsA prospective study was conducted in 13 care homes (9 residential and 4 nursing). Data on all medication administrations for a cohort of 345 older residents were recorded in real-time using a disguised observation technique. Every attempt by social care and nursing staff to administer medication over a 3-month observation period was analysed using BCMA records to determine the incidence and types of potential medication administration errors (MAEs) and whether errors were averted. Error classifications included attempts to administer medication at the wrong time, to the wrong person or discontinued medication. Further analysis compared data for residential and nursing homes. In addition, staff were surveyed prior to BCMA system implementation to assess their awareness of administration errors.ResultsA total of 188,249 medication administration attempts were analysed using BCMA data. Typically each resident was receiving nine different drugs and was exposed to 206 medication administration episodes every month. During the observation period, 2,289 potential MAEs were recorded for the 345 residents; 90% of residents were exposed to at least one error. The most common (n = 1,021, 45% of errors) was attempting to give medication at the wrong time. Over the 3-month observation period, half (52%) of residents were exposed to a serious error such as attempting to give medication to the wrong resident. Error incidence rates were 1.43 as high (95% CI 1.32-1.56 p < 0.001) in nursing homes as in residential homes. The level of non-compliance with system alerts was very low in both settings (0.075% of administrations). The pre-study survey revealed that only 12/41 staff administering drugs reported they were aware of potential administration errors in their care home.ConclusionsThe incidence of medication administration errors is high in long-term residential care. A barcode medication administration system can capture medication administration errors and prevent these from occurring.

Project description:PurposeMedications are mostly taken in patients' own homes, increasingly administered by carers, yet studies of medication safety have been largely conducted in the hospital setting. We aimed to review studies of how carers cause and/or prevent medication administration errors (MAEs) within the patient's home; to identify types, prevalence and causes of these MAEs and any interventions to prevent them.MethodsA narrative systematic review of literature published between 1 Jan 1946 and 23 Sep 2013 was carried out across the databases EMBASE, MEDLINE, PSYCHINFO, COCHRANE and CINAHL. Empirical studies were included where carers were responsible for preventing/causing MAEs in the home and standardised tools used for data extraction and quality assessment.ResultsThirty-six papers met the criteria for narrative review, 33 of which included parents caring for children, two predominantly comprised adult children and spouses caring for older parents/partners, and one focused on paid carers mostly looking after older adults. The carer administration error rate ranged from 1.9 to 33% of medications administered and from 12 to 92.7% of carers administering medication. These included dosage errors, omitted administration, wrong medication and wrong time or route of administration. Contributory factors included individual carer factors (e.g. carer age), environmental factors (e.g. storage), medication factors (e.g. number of medicines), prescription communication factors (e.g. comprehensibility of instructions), psychosocial factors (e.g. carer-to-carer communication), and care-recipient factors (e.g. recipient age). The few interventions effective in preventing MAEs involved carer training and tailored equipment.ConclusionThis review shows that home medication administration errors made by carers are a potentially serious patient safety issue. Carers made similar errors to those made by professionals in other contexts and a wide variety of contributory factors were identified. The home care setting should be a priority for the development of patient safety interventions.

Dataset Information

Prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors in clinical wards: A two-centre prospective observational study.

Aims and objectives

Background

Design

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Relevance to clinical practice

Publications

Prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors in clinical wards: A two-centre prospective observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets