Dataset Information

Incidence and Severity of Prescribing Errors in Parenteral Nutrition for Pediatric Inpatients at a Neonatal and Pediatric Intensive Care Unit.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

Pediatric inpatients are particularly vulnerable to medication errors (MEs), especially in highly individualized preparations like parenteral nutrition (PN). Aside from prescribing via a computerized physician order entry system (CPOE), we evaluated the effect of cross-checking by a clinical pharmacist to prevent harm from PN order errors in a neonatal and pediatric intensive care unit (NICU/PICU).

Methods

The incidence of prescribing errors in PN in a tertiary level NICU/PICU was surveyed prospectively between March 2012 and July 2013 (n = 3,012 orders). A pharmacist cross-checked all PN orders prior to preparation. Errors were assigned to seven different error-type categories. Three independent experts from different academic tertiary level NICUs judged the severity of each error according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) Index (categories A-I).

Results

The error rate was 3.9% for all 3,012 orders (118 prescribing errors in 111 orders). 77 (6.0%, 1,277 orders) errors occurred in the category concentration range, all concerning a relative overdose of calcium gluconate for peripheral infusion. The majority of all events (60%) were assigned to categories C and D (without major harmful consequences) while 28% could not be assigned due to missing majority decision. Potential harmful consequences requiring interventions (category E) could have occurred in 12% of assessments.

Conclusion

Next to systematic application of clinical guidelines and prescribing via CPOE, order review by a clinical pharmacist is still required to effectively reduce MEs and thus to prevent minor and major adverse drug events with the aim to enhance medication safety.

SUBMITTER: Hermanspann T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5491912 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:It has been suggested that doctors in their first year of post-graduate training make a disproportionate number of prescribing errors.This study aimed to compare the prevalence of prescribing errors made by first-year post-graduate doctors with that of errors by senior doctors and non-medical prescribers and to investigate the predictors of potentially serious prescribing errors.Pharmacists in 20 hospitals over 7 prospectively selected days collected data on the number of medication orders checked, the grade of prescriber and details of any prescribing errors. Logistic regression models (adjusted for clustering by hospital) identified factors predicting the likelihood of prescribing erroneously and the severity of prescribing errors.Pharmacists reviewed 26,019 patients and 124,260 medication orders; 11,235 prescribing errors were detected in 10,986 orders. The mean error rate was 8.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.6-9.1) errors per 100 medication orders. Rates of errors for all doctors in training were significantly higher than rates for medical consultants. Doctors who were 1 year (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95 % CI 1.80-2.52) or 2 years in training (OR 2.23; 95 % CI 1.89-2.65) were more than twice as likely to prescribe erroneously. Prescribing errors were 70 % (OR 1.70; 95 % CI 1.61-1.80) more likely to occur at the time of hospital admission than when medication orders were issued during the hospital stay. No significant differences in severity of error were observed between grades of prescriber. Potentially serious errors were more likely to be associated with prescriptions for parenteral administration, especially for cardiovascular or endocrine disorders.The problem of prescribing errors in hospitals is substantial and not solely a problem of the most junior medical prescribers, particularly for those errors most likely to cause significant patient harm. Interventions are needed to target these high-risk errors by all grades of staff and hence improve patient safety.

Project description:Background With a clinical pharmacists' participation in an intensive care unit (ICU) previous international studies have shown a reduction of medication errors, drug costs and improvements of clinical outcomes. Still there is a lack of qualitative data on clinical pharmacists' impact on prescribing error rates in the ICU. Therefore, a new approach was developed relating prescribing errors to the number of monitored medications including physicians' approval on all prescribing errors. Objective This study investigates the influence of clinical pharmacists' medication review on the prescribing error rate in an ICU. Setting A controlled interventional study was conducted in a surgical ICU with one control phase (P0) and two intervention phases (P1 and P2). Method The investigation aimed to determine if the medication review by clinical pharmacists results in a significant reduction of prescribing errors related to a control period. In contrast to previous studies, prescribing errors detected by the clinical pharmacists, were only taken into account, if consent with the physicians was achieved. Secondary outcomes were the reduction of potentially severe prescribing errors, the number of days without systemic anti-infective therapy and the ICU length of stay. Throughout P0 the data was collected retrospectively without any intervention. During the intervention periods P1 and P2, two clinical pharmacists screened the medical records for prescribing errors and discussed them with the senior physician in charge. During P2 one clinical pharmacist attended ward rounds additionally. Main Outcome Measure The main outcome measure of this study was the number of prescribing errors detected related to the number of monitored medications. Results The incidence of prescribing errors was significantly reduced from 1660 in P0 to 622 in P1 respectively 401 in P2 (P0 vs. P1/P2 respectively; both p < 0.001; Fisher's Exact Test) in total, respective 14.12% in P0 vs. 5.13% in P1 and 3.25% in P2 related to the monitored medications (P0:11755; P1:12134; P2:12329). Conclusion Clinical pharmacists' interventions led to a significant reduction of prescribing errors in the ICU, contributing to a safer medication process. We strongly recommend a broad implementation of clinical pharmacists in ICUs.

Project description:ImportanceIncoming text messages and calls on nurses' mobile telephones may interrupt medication administration, but whether such interruptions are associated with errors has not been established.ObjectiveTo assess whether a temporal association exists between mobile telephone interruptions and subsequent errors by pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) nurses during medication administration.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study was performed using telecommunications and electronic health record data from a PICU in a children's hospital. Data were collected from August 1, 2016, through September 30, 2017. Participants included 257 nurses and the 3308 patients to whom they administered medications.ExposuresPrimary exposures were incoming telephone calls and text messages received on the institutional mobile telephone assigned to the nurse in the 10 minutes leading up to a medication administration attempt. Secondary exposures were the nurse's PICU experience, work shift (day vs night), nurse to patient ratio, and level of patient care required.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary outcome, errors during medication administration, was a composite of reported medication administration errors and bar code medication administration error alerts generated when nurses attempted to give medications without active orders for the patient whose bar code they scanned.ResultsParticipants included 257 nurses, of whom 168 (65.4%) had 6 months or more of PICU experience; and 3308 patients, of whom 1839 (55.6%) were male, 1539 (46.5%) were white, and 2880 (87.1%) were non-Hispanic. The overall rate of errors during 238 540 medication administration attempts was 3.1% (95% CI, 3.0%-3.3%) when nurses were uninterrupted by incoming telephone calls and 3.7% (95% CI, 3.4%-4.0%) when they were interrupted by such calls. During day shift, the odds ratios (ORs) for error when interrupted by calls (compared with uninterrupted) were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.92-1.13; P = .73) among nurses with 6 months or more of PICU experience and 1.22 (95% CI, 1.00-1.47; P = .046) among nurses with less than 6 months of experience. During night shift, the ORs for error when interrupted by calls were 1.35 (95% CI, 1.16-1.57; P < .001) among nurses with 6 months or more of PICU experience and 1.53 (95% CI, 1.16-2.03; P = .003) among nurses with less than 6 months of experience. Nurses administering medications to 1 or more patients receiving mechanical ventilation and arterial catheterization while caring for at least 1 other patient had an increased risk of error (OR, 1.21; 95% CI, 1.03-1.42; P = .02). Incoming text messages were not associated with error (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.92-1.02; P = .22).Conclusions and relevanceThis study's findings suggest that incoming telephone call interruptions may be temporally associated with medication administration errors among PICU nurses. Risk of error varied by shift, experience, nurse to patient ratio, and level of patient care required.