Dataset Information

Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database.

ABSTRACT: Background:The aim of this study was to determine the current magnitude and characteristics of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) errors, and to identify opportunities for improving the PCA modality. Methods:We conducted a descriptive analysis of IV-PCA medication errors submitted to the MEDMARX database. Events were restricted to those occurring in inpatient hospital settings between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2015. IV-PCA errors were classified by error category, cause of error, error type, level of care rendered, and actions taken. Results:A total of 1948 IV-PCA errors were identified as potential errors (3.9%), nonharmful errors (89.5%), or harmful errors (6.7%) based on the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention taxonomy for categorizing medication errors. Of these, 19.1% required a clinical intervention to address the deleterious effects of the error, indicating an underestimation of the risks associated with IV-PCA errors. The most frequent types of errors were improper dose/quantity (43.2%) and omission errors (19.9%). While human performance deficit was the leading cause of error (50.2%), other common causes included failure to follow procedure and protocol (42.2%) and improper use of the pump (22.7%). Although remedial actions were often taken to prevent error recurrence, actions were taken to rectify the systemic deficits that led to errors in only a minority of cases (11.8%). Conclusion:Preventable errors continue to pose unnecessary risks to patients receiving IV-PCA. Multimodal analgesic regimens and novel PCA systems that reduce human error are needed to prevent errors while preserving the advantages of PCA for the management of acute pain.

SUBMITTER: Mohanty M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6199682 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database.

Mohanty Maitreyee M Lawal Oluwadolapo D OD Skeer Margie M Lanier Ryan R Erpelding Nathalie N Katz Nathaniel N

Therapeutic advances in drug safety 20180426 8

<h4>Background</h4>The aim of this study was to determine the current magnitude and characteristics of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) errors, and to identify opportunities for improving the PCA modality.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a descriptive analysis of IV-PCA medication errors submitted to the MEDMARX database. Events were restricted to those occurring in inpatient hospital settings between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2015. IV-PCA errors were classified by error catego ...[more]

PMID: 30364852

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThis study aimed to compare the efficacy between patient-controlled caudal epidural analgesia (PCCA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after perianal surgery, to provide a feasible solution to postoperative pain.MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized controlled trial comprising 100 patients who underwent caudal epidural block on perianal surgery at Chengdu Shang Jin Nan Fu Hospital of West China Hospital at Sichuan University between April and August 2020. Patients were randomly divided into the PCCA and PCIA groups. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at 2, 4, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery, and at the first dressing change and first defecation. The lower limb mobility in the post-anesthetic recovery room (PACU) was determined. The analgesic effect, usage amount of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), usage amount and frequency of remedial analgesic measures, number of individuals who must be catheterized, and incidence of adverse reactions were recorded. Satisfaction of postoperative analgesic effect and convenience of PCA were also assessed.ResultsThe patients in the PCCA group had significantly lower VAS scores at 4, 6, 24, 48, 72 h, the first dressing change, and the first defecation compared with the PCIA group. There were more patients receiving postoperative remedial analgesics in the PCIA group than in the PCCA group. The outcome of the number of PCA and catheterization rates did not differ significantly between the groups. There were two cases of sensory numbness below the S3 plane. The major postoperative complications in the PCIA group were pruritus (3/47, 6.4%), nausea, and vomiting (6/47, 12.8%) (one case combined with pruritus). Patients in the PCCA group were more satisfied with the analgesic effect, while those in the PCIA group were more satisfied with the convenience.ConclusionIn the postoperative analgesia program of perianal surgery, PCCA may provide a better analgesic effect without increasing the incidence of complications.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier, ChiCTR2000038425, September 2020, retrospectively registered.

Project description:IntroductionBoth regional analgesia and intravenous analgesia are frequently used perioperatively for patients with critical limb ischaemia (CLI). Nevertheless, the comparison of perioperative effect of regional and intravenous analgesia has not yet been thoroughly illustrated. This study will comprehensively compare patient-controlled regional analgesia (PCRA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) as two different perioperative analgesia approaches for patients with CLI. It investigates their effects on analgesia, reperfusion and the quality of recovery perioperatively, also aims to provide clinical evidence to those non-surgical patients with non-reconstructable arteries.Methods and analysisThis trial is a randomised, single-centre, open-label, parallel trial with target sample size of 52 in total. Eligible participants will be randomly allocated to the PCRA group (group R) or the PCIA group (group I) after admission. Participants in group R will receive ultrasound-guided subgluteal sciatic catheterisation, followed by continuous PCRA infusion (0.2% ropivacaine 15 mL as loading dose, 8 mL/hour as background with a patient-controlled bolus of 6 mL). Participants in group I will receive PCIA (morphine is given in boluses of 1 mg as needed, background infusion at 1 mg/hour). Data will be collected at baseline (T0), 2 hours before revascularisation treatment (T1) and 2 hours before discharge (T2). The primary outcomes include the Numerical Rating Scale pain score at T1 and T2. The secondary outcomes include the perioperative transcutaneous oxygen pressure, the Tissue Haemoglobin Index, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale at T1 and T2; the Patient Global Impression of Change and patient satisfaction at T1 and T2; the perioperative cumulative morphine consumption, the length of postoperative hospital stay and adverse events.Ethics and disseminationThis study received authorisation from the Institutional Review Board of Peking Union Medical College Hospital on 21 March 2017 (approval no. ZS-1289X). Study findings will be disseminated through presentations at scientific conferences or publications in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration numberChinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2000029298).Protocol versionV.4CP.B2 (15 June 2020).

Project description:BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:The use of patient-controlled epidural analgesia after various operations has been associated with an early return of bowel function, thus decreasing patients' length of stay (LOS). The primary aim of this study was to compare LOS after radical cystectomy between patients who received epidural analgesia versus those who received intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Our secondary analysis included the assessment of other metrics such as total opioid requirements, pain scores, return of bowel function, and complication rates between the 2 groups. METHODS:We conducted a retrospective review using the electronic medical records of 308 patients who underwent radical cystectomies at Memorial Sloan Kettering between 2006 and 2011. We aimed to understand if epidural analgesia was associated with a reduced LOS compared with patient-controlled intravenous opioid analgesia. We also aimed to identify performance improvements as a function of epidural analgesia status using various metrics such as pain management, bowel function return, and complication rates. We used both univariate and multivariate analyses to identify if epidural analgesia was associated with meaningful differences in the aforementioned metrics. RESULTS:Median age at radical cystectomy, body mass index, sex, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, and T stage were similar for both groups. For our primary objective of LOS, we found no significant difference between the 2 cohorts (8 vs 7 days, P = 0.2). Analysis of our secondary outcome measures revealed that epidural analgesia use was associated with less total opioid requirement for the first 3 postoperative days (PODs) (P = 0.0001). In addition, epidural analgesia was found to be associated with improved postoperative pain scores compared with intravenous patient-controlled analgesia on PODs 1 (P = 0.0001) and 2 (P = 0.004), and there was a slight improvement on POD 3, but this was not significant (P = 0.77). In contrast, we found no difference between pain management types with regard to proportion of patients who experienced a delay in gastrointestinal recovery, fluid bolus requirements within the first 3 perioperative days, rates of infection, pulmonary complications, and grade 3 or greater complications. CONCLUSIONS:We have demonstrated that, despite significant improvements in initial pain control and less opioid requirement with patient-controlled epidural analgesia, there was no association between analgesic approach and LOS, return of bowel function, or complications.

Dataset Information

Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database.

Publications

Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets