Factors predictive of intravenous fluid administration errors in Australian surgical care wards

Background: Intravenous (IV) fluid administration is an integral component of clinical care. Errors in administration can cause detrimental patient outcomes and increase healthcare costs, although little is known about medication administration errors associated with continuous IV infusions. Objectives: ( 1) To ascertain the prevalence of medication administration errors for continuous IV infusions and identify the variables that caused them. ( 2) To quantify the probability of errors by fitting a logistic regression model to the data. Methods: A prospective study was conducted on three surgical wards at a teaching hospital in Australia. All study participants received continuous infusions of IV fluids. Parenteral nutrition and non-electrolyte containing intermittent drug infusions ( such as antibiotics) were excluded. Medication administration errors and contributing variables were documented using a direct observational approach. Results: Six hundred and eighty seven observations were made, with 124 (18.0%) having at least one medication administration error. The most common error observed was wrong administration rate. The median deviation from the prescribed rate was 247 ml/h (interquartile range 275 to + 33.8 ml/ h). Errors were more likely to occur if an IV infusion control device was not used and as the duration of the infusion increased. Conclusions: Administration errors involving continuous IV infusions occur frequently. They could be reduced by more common use of IV infusion control devices and regular checking of administration rates.

Medication management at home: medication-related risk factors associated with poor health outcomes

Background: some patients may have medication-related risk factors only identified by home visits, but the extent to which those risk factors are associated with poor health outcomes remains unclear. Objective: to determine the association between medication-related risk factors and poor patient health outcomes from observations in the patients' homes. Design: cross-sectional study. Setting: patients' homes. Subjects: 204 general practice patients living in their own homes and at risk of medication-related poor health outcomes. Methods: medications and medication-related risk factors were identified in the patients' homes by community pharmacists and general practitioners (GPs). The medication-related risk factors were examined as determinants of patients' self-reported health related quality of life (SF-36) and their medication use, as well as physicians' impression of patient adverse drug events and health status. Results: key medication-related risk factors associated with poor health outcomes included: Lack of any medication administration routine, therapeutic duplication, hoarding, confusion between generic and trade names, multiple prescribers, discontinued medication repeats retained and multiple storage locations. Older age and female gender were associated with some poorer health outcomes. In addition, expired medication and poor adherence were also associated with poor health outcomes, however, not independently. Conclusion: the findings support the theory that polypharmacy and medication-related risk factors as a result of polypharmacy are correlated to poor health outcomes.

Effects of patient-focused care on seclusion in a psychiatric intensive care unit

The objective of the study was to evaluate whether the introduction of patient-focused nursing care affected the number of seclusions and the length of time patients spent in seclusion, in an acute psychiatric unit. The study used a pre-intervention–post-intervention design and was conducted in an eight-bed locked unit within a large regional general hospital in Queensland, Australia. The medical records of all people who were secluded as part of their management while in hospital, during two 6-month periods, were retrospectively reviewed. Changes to the ways in which nurses conducted their daily activities were implemented during the time between the data collection periods. There were no differences between the groups with respect to the number of times a patient was secluded. However, following implementation of patient-focused care, there was a reduction in the length of time for which patients were secluded. The only change in medication administration was that post-implementation, Haloperidol was used in fewer seclusion episodes. The findings indicate that changes to nursing practice may result in closer monitoring of patients and a reduction in the time patients spend secluded in acute inpatient psychiatric settings.

Factors influencing PRN medication use in nursing homes

Objective: To identify determinants of PRN ( as needed) drug use in nursing homes. Decisions about the use of these medications are made expressly by nursing home staff when general medical practitioners (GPs) prescribe medications for PRN use. Method: Cross-sectional drug use data were collected during a 7-day window from 13 Australian nursing homes. Information was collected on the size, staffing-mix, number of visiting GPs, number of medication rounds, and mortality rates in each nursing home. Resident specific measures collected included age, gender, length of stay, recent hospitalisation and care needs. Main outcome measures: The number of PRN orders prescribed per resident and the number of PRN doses given per week averaged over the number of PRN medications given at all in the seven-day period. Results: Approximately 35% of medications were prescribed for PRN use. Higher PRN use was found for residents with the lower care needs, recent hospitalisation and more frequent doses of regularly scheduled medications. With increasing length of stay, PRN medication orders initially increased then declined but the number of doses given declined from admission. While some resident-specific characteristics did influence PRN drug use, the key determinant for PRN medication orders was the specific nursing home in which a resident lived. Resident age and gender were not determinants of PRN drug use. Conclusion: The determinants of PRN drug use suggest that interventions to optimize PRN medications should target the care of individual residents, prescribing and the nursing home processes and policies that govern PRN drug use.

PRN Sedation-patterns of prescribing and administration in a child and adolescent mental health inpatient service

Objective: To identify utilisation rates of prn (pro re nata) sedation in children and adolescents receiving inpatient psychiatric treatment, and to compare correlates of prn prescribing and administration. Method A retrospective chart review examined 122 medical charts from a child and youth mental health inpatient service. Results 71.3% of patients were prescribed prn sedation and 50.8% were administered prn sedation. Patients received an average of 8.0 doses of prn sedation, with 9.8% receiving 10 or more doses. Chlorpromazine and diazepam were the most commonly utilised agents. Prescribing of prn sedation was only related to use of regular medications (p < 0.01), and non-parent carers (p < 0.01). In contrast, administration of prn sedation was associated with multiple diagnoses (p < 0.01), pervasive development disorder (p < 0.01), mental retardation (p < 0.01) ADHD (p < 0.01), longer hospital admission (p < 0.01), use of atypical antipsychotics (p < 0.01) and polypharmacy (p < 0.01). Conclusions Despite lack of data to inform practice, prn sedation is widely utilised, especially in complex patients. Future research in this area needs to incorporate nurses and examine whether patients benefit from prn sedation, which drugs and dosing patterns optimise safety and efficacy, and what is the role of prn sedation in the context of other medication.