Dataset Information

The Influence of Nurses' Characteristics on Medication Administration Errors: An Integrative Review.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Medication administration errors (MAEs) are a frequent cause of morbidity and mortality in acute care settings and can result in a prolonged hospital stay. The WHO estimated that medication errors cost up to $42 billion globally per a year. Therefore, MAEs was among the most common medical errors to occur in acute care settings. Studies of medication error usually focus on system factors, thus creating a gap between what researchers know about the causes of MAEs, and what frontline nurses actually do in the clinical setting. The purpose of this review is to fill a gap in the existing literature by focusing on the relationship between nurses' characteristics and MAEs.

Methods

Online databases were accessed, including CINAHL, PsycINFO, PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar from 2007-2020 period. This review was guided by the methods described by Whittemore and Knafl. Studies that addressed the occurrence of medication errors based on RN demographics were included in this review. The included studies were reviewed and analyzed by the two authors.

Results

Of the 1141 publications retrieved, 19 studies met inclusion criteria. The result provided strong evidence that nurses' level of education, length of experience, and attendance at training courses, are directly associated with the occurrence of MAEs. There is weak evidence of MAEs being influenced by the age and gender of nurses. Other nurse characteristics, such as cognitive load, frustration with technology, negligence, lack of attentiveness, and nurse ethnicity, are not adequately examined across the reviewed studies necessitates further research.

Conclusion

Focusing on nurses' characteristics might facilitate other researchers to suggest appropriate interventions that may reduce the incidence of MAEs. Interventional studies may provide convincing evidence as to whether one variable has a causal effect on another variable, and control the influence of confounding variables to enhance the generalizability of the findings.

SUBMITTER: Kerari A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8223601 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

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.

Project description:BackgroundDespite extensive research carried out on medication administration errors (MAEs) in the domain of infusion therapy, there is limited knowledge on nurse's perceptions on the occurrence of MAEs during infusion therapy. Since nurses are responsible for medication preparation and administration in Dutch hospitals, it is vital to understand their perspectives on the risk factors for MAEs.AimThe purpose of this study is to investigate the perception of nurses, working in adult ICUs, on the occurrence of MAEs during continuous infusion therapies.MethodsA digital web-based survey was distributed among 373 ICU nurses working in Dutch hospitals. The survey investigated nurses' perceptions on the frequency, severity of consequences and preventability of MAEs, factors for the occurrence of MAEs, and infusion pump and smart infusion safety technology.ResultsA total of 300 nurses started to fill out the survey but only 91 of them (30.3%) fully completed it and were included in analyses. Medication-related factors and Care professional-related factors were perceived as the two most important risk categories for the occurrence of MAEs. Important risk factors contributing to the occurrence of MAEs included high patient-nurse ratio, problems in communication between caregivers, frequent staff changes and transfers of care, and no/incorrect dosage/concentration on labels. Drug library was reported as the most important infusion pump feature and both Bar Code Medication Administration (BCMA) and medical device connectivity as the two most important smart infusion safety technologies. Nurses perceived the majority of MAEs as preventable.ConclusionsBased on ICU nurses' perceptions, the present study suggests that strategies to reduce MAEs in these units should focus on, among other factors, the high patient-to-nurse ratio, problems in communication between nurses, frequent staff changes and transfers of care, and no/incorrect dosage/concentration on drug labels.

Project description:ObjectiveThis study was conducted to assess the magnitude and contributing factors of medication administration errors among nurses in federal hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.DesignA hospital-based cross-sectional study design was employed. Data on medication administration and associated factors were collected using a structured self-administered questionnaire. Multivariable binary logistic regression analysis was done to identify factors associated with medication administration errors on the basis of adjusted OR with 95% CI and a p value less than 0.05.SettingThis study was conducted in federal hospitals in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.ParticipantsFour hundred and twenty-three randomly selected nurses participated.Outcome measuresThe primary outcome variable is medication administration error, which was ascertained using the following errors: wrong medication, wrong dose, wrong time, wrong route, wrong patient, wrong drug preparation, wrong advice, wrong assessment and wrong documentations.ResultsA total of 59.9% (95% CI: 55.0% to 64.8%) of the nurses in the federal hospitals in Addis Ababa committed one or more medication administration errors in the last 12 months prior to the survey. The most commonly reported medication errors were wrong time (56.8%), wrong documentation (33.3%), wrong advice (27.8%) and wrong dose (20.1%). Medication administration errors among nurses were significantly associated with short work experience (adjusted OR (AOR): 6.48, 95% CI: 1.32 to 31.78), night shift work (AOR: 5.0, 95% CI: 1.82 to 13.78), absence of on-the-job training (AOR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.67 to 6.00), unavailability of medication administration guidelines in wards (AOR: 2.07, 95% CI: 1.06 to 4.06) and interruptions during medication administration (AOR: 2.42, 95% CI: 1.30 to 4.49).ConclusionIt was found that a high proportion of nurses in federal hospitals committed medication administration errors. Short work experience, night shift work, absence of on-the-job training, unavailability of medication administration guidelines and interruptions during medication administration explained the high magnitude of medication administration errors.

Project description:To 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.We 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.In 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.Automated 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:BACKGROUND: Older 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: A 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. CONCLUSIONS: The 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:Introduction: Pediatric patients cared for in professional healthcare settings are at high risk of medication errors. Interventions to improve patient safety often focus on prescribing; however, the subsequent stages in the medication use process (dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring) are also error-prone. This systematic review aims to identify and analyze interventions to reduce dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors in professional pediatric healthcare settings. Methods: Four databases were searched for experimental studies with separate control and intervention groups, published in English between 2011 and 2019. Interventions were classified for the first time in pediatric medication safety according to the "hierarchy of controls" model, which predicts that interventions at higher levels are more likely to bring about change. Higher-level interventions aim to reduce risks through elimination, substitution, or engineering controls. Examples of these include the introduction of smart pumps instead of standard pumps (a substitution control) and the introduction of mandatory barcode scanning for drug administration (an engineering control). Administrative controls such as guidelines, warning signs, and educational approaches are lower on the hierarchy and therefore predicted by this model to be less likely to be successful. Results: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1 study of dispensing errors, 7 studies of drug administration errors, and 12 studies targeting multiple steps of the medication use process. A total of 44 interventions were identified. Eleven of these were considered higher-level controls (four substitution and seven engineering controls). The majority of interventions (n = 33) were considered "administrative controls" indicating a potential reliance on these measures. Studies that implemented higher-level controls were observed to be more likely to reduce errors, confirming that the hierarchy of controls model may be useful in this setting. Heterogeneous study methods, definitions, and outcome measures meant that a meta-analysis was not appropriate. Conclusions: When designing interventions to reduce pediatric dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors, the hierarchy of controls model should be considered, with a focus placed on the introduction of higher-level controls, which may be more likely to reduce errors than the administrative controls often seen in practice. Trial Registration Prospero Identifier: CRD42016047127.

Project description:Hospitalized children are at risk of medication errors (MEs) due to complex dosage calculations and preparations. Incident reporting systems may facilitate prevention of MEs but underreporting potentially undermines this system. We aimed to examine whether scenarios involving medications should be reported to a national mandatory incident reporting system and the likelihood of self- and peer-reporting these scenarios among paediatric nurses and physicians.Participants' reporting of MEs was explored through a questionnaire involving 20 medication scenarios. The scenarios represented different steps in the medication process, types of error, patient outcomes and medications. Reporting rates and odds ratios with 95% confidence interval [OR, (95% CI)] were calculated. Barriers to and enablers of reporting were identified through content analysis of participants' comments.The response rate was 42% (291/689). Overall, 61% of participants reported that scenarios should be reported. The likelihood of reporting was 60% for self-reporting and 37% for peer-reporting. Nurses versus physicians, and healthcare professionals with versus without patient safety responsibilities assessed to a larger extent that the scenarios should be reported [OR = 1.34 (1.05-1.70) and OR = 1.41 (1.12-1.78), respectively]; were more likely to self-report, [OR = 2.81 (1.71-4.62) and OR = 2.93 (1.47-5.84), respectively]; and were more likely to peer-report [OR = 1.89 (1.36-2.63) and OR = 3.61 (2.57-5.06), respectively].Healthcare professionals with versus without management responsibilities were more likely to peer-report [OR = 5.16 (3.44-7.72)]. Participants reported that scenarios resulting in actual injury or incidents considered to have a learning potential should be reported.The likelihood of underreporting scenarios was high among paediatric nurses and physicians. Nurses and staff with patient safety responsibilities were more likely to assess that scenarios should be reported and to report. Incidents with actual injury or learning potential were more likely to be reported. The potential for improving reporting rates involving MEs seems high.