Implementation of an audit with feedback knowledge translation intervention to promote medication error reporting in health care: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals strive to deliver high-quality care in an inherently complex and error-prone environment. Underreporting of medical errors challenges attempts to understand causative factors and impedes efforts to implement preventive strategies. Audit with feedback is a knowledge translation strategy that has potential to modify health professionals' medical error reporting behaviour. However, evidence regarding which aspects of this complex, multi-dimensional intervention work best is lacking. The aims of the Safe Medication Audit Reporting Translation (SMART) study are to: 1. Implement and refine a reporting mechanism to feed audit data on medication errors back to nurses 2. Test the feedback reporting mechanism to determine its utility and effect 3. Identify characteristics of organisational context associated with error reporting in response to feedback METHODS/DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design, incorporating two pairs of matched wards at an acute care hospital, is used. Randomisation occurs at the ward level; one ward from each pair is randomised to receive the intervention. A key stakeholder reference group informs the design and delivery of the feedback intervention. Nurses on the intervention wards receive the feedback intervention (feedback of analysed audit data) on a quarterly basis for 12 months. Data for the feedback intervention come from medication documentation point-prevalence audits and weekly reports on routinely collected medication error data. Weekly reports on these data are obtained for the control wards. A controlled interrupted time series analysis is used to evaluate the effect of the feedback intervention. Self-report data are also collected from nurses on all four wards at baseline and at completion of the intervention to elicit their perceptions of the work context. Additionally, following each feedback cycle, nurses on the intervention wards are invited to complete a survey to evaluate the feedback and to establish their intentions to change their reporting behaviour. To assess sustainability of the intervention, at 6 months following completion of the intervention a point-prevalence chart audit is undertaken and a report of routinely collected medication errors for the previous 6 months is obtained. This intervention will have wider application for delivery of feedback to promote behaviour change for other areas of preventable error and adverse events.

Medication errors in a swiss cardiovascular surgery department: a cross-sectional study based on a novel medication error report method

The purpose of this study was (1) to determine frequency and type of medication errors (MEs), (2) to assess the number of MEs prevented by registered nurses, (3) to assess the consequences of ME for patients, and (4) to compare the number of MEs reported by a newly developed medication error self-reporting tool to the number reported by the traditional incident reporting system. We conducted a cross-sectional study on ME in the Cardiovascular Surgery Department of Bern University Hospital in Switzerland. Eligible registered nurses (n = 119) involving in the medication process were included. Data on ME were collected using an investigator-developed medication error self reporting tool (MESRT) that asked about the occurrence and characteristics of ME. Registered nurses were instructed to complete a MESRT at the end of each shift even if there was no ME. All MESRTs were completed anonymously. During the one-month study period, a total of 987 MESRTs were returned. Of the 987 completed MESRTs, 288 (29%) indicated that there had been an ME. Registered nurses reported preventing 49 (5%) MEs. Overall, eight (2.8%) MEs had patient consequences. The high response rate suggests that this new method may be a very effective approach to detect, report, and describe ME in hospitals.

Nurse likelihood to report a pediatric medication error: Examination of the "pre-reporting" period

Each year, hospitalized patients experience 1.5 million preventable injuries from medication errors and hospitals incur an additional $3.5 billion in cost (Aspden, Wolcott, Bootman, & Cronenwatt; (2007). It is believed that error reporting is one way to learn about factors contributing to medication errors. And yet, an estimated 50% of medication errors go unreported. This period of medication error pre-reporting, with few exceptions, is underexplored. The literature focuses on error prevention and management, but lacks a description of the period of introspection and inner struggle over whether to report an error and resulting likelihood to report. Reporting makes a nurse vulnerable to reprimand, legal liability, and even threat to licensure. For some nurses this state may invoke a disparity between a person‘s belief about him or herself as a healer and the undeniable fact of the error.^ This study explored the medication error reporting experience. Its purpose was to inform nurses, educators, organizational leaders, and policy-makers about the medication error pre-reporting period, and to contribute to a framework for further investigation. From a better understanding of factors that contribute to or detract from the likelihood of an individual to report an error, interventions can be identified to help the nurse come to a psychologically healthy resolution and help increase reporting of error in order to learn from error and reduce the possibility of future similar error.^ The research question was: "What factors contribute to a nurse's likelihood to report an error?" The specific aims of the study were to: (1) describe participant nurses' perceptions of medication error reporting; (2) describe participant explanations of the emotional, cognitive, and physical reactions to making a medication error; (3) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it less likely for a nurse to report a medication error; and (4) identify pre-reporting conditions that make it more likely for a nurse to report a medication error.^ A qualitative research study was conducted to explore the medication error experience and in particular the pre-reporting period from the perspective of the nurse. A total of 54 registered nurses from a large private free-standing not-for-profit children's hospital in the southwestern United States participated in group interviews. The results describe the experience of the nurse as well as the physical, emotional, and cognitive responses to the realization of the commission of a medication error. The results also reveal factors that make it more and less likely to report a medication error.^ It is clear from this study that upon realization that he or she has made a medication error, a nurse's foremost concern is for the safety of the patient. Fear was also described by each group of nurses. The nurses described a fear of several things including physician reaction, manager reaction, peer reaction, as well as family reaction and possible lack of trust as a result. Another universal response was the description of a struggle with guilt, shame, imperfection, blaming oneself, and questioning one's competence.^

Medication error in mental health:implications for primary care

Medication errors are associated with significant morbidity and people with mental health problems may be particularly susceptible to medication errors due to various factors. Primary care has a key role in improving medication safety in this vulnerable population. The complexity of services, involving primary and secondary care and social services, and potential training issues may increase error rates, with physical medicines representing a particular risk. Service users may be cognitively impaired and fail to identify an error placing additional responsibilities on clinicians. The potential role of carers in error prevention and medication safety requires further elaboration. A potential lack of trust between service users and clinicians may impair honest communication about medication issues leading to errors. There is a need for detailed research within this field.

Impact of automated dispensing cabinets on medication selection and preparation error rates in an emergency department: a prospective and direct observational before-and-after study

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The implementation of automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) in healthcare facilities appears to be increasing, in particular within Australian hospital emergency departments (EDs). While the investment in ADCs is on the increase, no studies have specifically investigated the impacts of ADCs on medication selection and preparation error rates in EDs. Our aim was to assess the impact of ADCs on medication selection and preparation error rates in an ED of a tertiary teaching hospital. METHODS: Pre intervention and post intervention study involving direct observations of nurses completing medication selection and preparation activities before and after the implementation of ADCs in the original and new emergency departments within a 377-bed tertiary teaching hospital in Australia. Medication selection and preparation error rates were calculated and compared between these two periods. Secondary end points included the impact on medication error type and severity. RESULTS: A total of 2087 medication selection and preparations were observed among 808 patients pre and post intervention. Implementation of ADCs in the new ED resulted in a 64.7% (1.96% versus 0.69%, respectively, P = 0.017) reduction in medication selection and preparation errors. All medication error types were reduced in the post intervention study period. There was an insignificant impact on medication error severity as all errors detected were categorised as minor. CONCLUSION: The implementation of ADCs could reduce medication selection and preparation errors and improve medication safety in an ED setting.

Nursing-related medication errors: A review of factors that facilitate and hinder error reporting, and recommendations for improvement

Medication errors, one of the most frequent types of medical errors, are a common cause of patient harm in hospital systems today. Nurses at the bedside are in a position to encounter many of these errors since they are there at the start of the process (ordering/prescribing) and the end of the process (administration). One of the recommendations from the IOM (Institute of Medicine) report, "To Err is Human," was for organizations to identify and learn from medical errors through event reporting systems. While many organizations have reporting systems in place, research studies report a significant amount of underreporting by nurses. A systematic review of the literature was performed to identify contributing factors related to the reporting and not reporting of medication errors by nurses at the bedside.^ Articles included in the literature review were primary or secondary studies, dated January 1, 2000 – July 2009, related to nursing medication error reporting. All 634 articles were reviewed with an algorithm developed to standardize the review process and help filter out those that did not meet the study criteria. In addition, 142 article bibliographies were reviewed to find additional studies that were not found in the original literature search.^ After reviewing the 634 articles and the additional 108 articles discovered in the bibliography review, 41 articles met the study criteria and were used in the systematic literature review results.^ Fear of punitive reactions to medication errors was a frequent barrier to error reporting. Nurses fear reactions from their leadership, peers, patients and their families, nursing boards, and the media. Anonymous reporting systems and departments/organizations with a strong safety culture in place helped to encourage the reporting of medication errors by nursing staff.^ Many of the studies included in this literature review do not allow results that can be generalized. The majority of them took place in single institutions/organizations with limited sample sizes. Stronger studies with larger sample sizes need to be performed, utilizing data collection methods that have been validated, to determine stronger correlations between safety cultures and nurse error reporting.^

Description of a multifaceted strategy for recruiting general practitioners and community pharmacists to talk about medication errors

Objective: To describe the use of a multifaceted strategy for recruiting general practitioners (GPs) and community pharmacists to talk about medication errors which have resulted in preventable drug-related admissions to hospital. This is a potentially sensitive subject with medicolegal implications. Setting: Four primary care trusts and one teaching hospital in the UK. Method: Letters were mailed to community pharmacists and general practitioners asking for provisional consent to be interviewed and permission to contact them again should a patient be admitted to hospital as a result of a medication error. In addition, GPs were asked for permission to approach their patients should they be admitted to hospital. A multifaceted approach to recruitment was used including gaining support for the study from professional defence agencies and local champions. Key findings: Eighty-five percent (310/385) of GPs and 62% (93/149) of community pharmacists responded to the letters. Eighty-five percent (266/310) of GPs who responded and 81% (75/93) of community pharmacists who responded gave provisional consent to participate in interviews. All GPs (14 out of 14) and community pharmacists (10 out of 10) who were subsequently asked to participate, when patients were admitted to hospital, agreed to be interviewed. Conclusion: The multifaceted approach to recruitment was associated with an impressive response when asking healthcare professionals to be interviewed about medication errors which have resulted in preventable drug-related morbidity.

Implementation of a medication guideline to improve medication safety for patients

Although the incidence of medication error remains unknown, in Australian hospitals, they are thought to occur in 5-20 % of drug administrations 1. Not surprisingly, international debate has focused on the mechanisms to improve the safety of patients. Thus a new National Inpatient Medication Chart (NIMC) was endorsed to improve communication and reduce medication errors 2. This study aimed to investigate the documentation practices of clinicians following the implementation of a medication guideline and NIMC.
A pre and post-test design was used to evaluate the adoption of and adherence to the medication guideline at Western Health, an 850 bed healthcare network in Australia. Audits of inpatient medication charts (N=265) were conducted at 3 months prior to and repeated 4 months (N=290) after implementation. The pre-test data was used to formulate an interdisciplinary organizational strategy that included mandatory education for all clinical staff, practice reminders, decision prompts, a telephone hotline for support, an intranet information website and electronically distributed Frequently Asked Questions.
Pre and post implementation audits highlighted areas of potential medication error. The post-test showed an overall trend towards improvement in documentation. There were significant improvements in 4 critical practices: Drug name clear (p=0.0003); Drug dose clear (p=0.0002); Prescribed frequency equals documented frequency (p=0) and; No signature by administrator (p=0).
The majority of documentation errors showed poor attention to detail and would be considered a slip or lapse in skill based judgment 3. Although this study was designed to evaluate documentation practices, future research should include observation methods to increase our understanding of the context behind the judgments such as work place interruptions, skill mix and knowledge levels. While evidence based guidelines enable work, they are not the actual work or substance of patient care. Organisational systems can assist in preventing unconscious aberrations that lead to error.

Nurses' role in medication safety

Aim To explore the nurses role in the process of medication management and identify the challenges associated with safe medication management in contemporary clinical practice.
Background Medication errors have been a long-standing factor affecting consumer safety. The nursing profession has been identified as essential to the promotion of patient safety.
Evaluation A review of literature on medication errors and the use of electronic prescribing in medication errors.
Key issues Medication management requires a multidisciplinary approach and interdisciplinary communication is essential to reduce medication errors. Information technologies can help to reduce some medication errors through eradication of transcription and dosing errors. Nurses must play a major role in the design of computerized medication systems to ensure a smooth transition to such as system.
Conclusion The nurses roles in medication management cannot be over-emphasized. This is particularly true when designing a computerized medication system.
Implication for nursing management The adoption of safety measures during decision making that parallel those of the aviation industry safety procedures can provide some strategies to prevent medication error. Innovations in information technology offer potential mechanisms to avert adverse events in medication management for nurses.

Reported medication errors after introducing an electronic medication management system

Aims and objectives
To explore the effects of introducing an electronic medication management system on reported medication errors.
Background
Computerised medication management systems have been found to improve medication safety; however, introducing medication management system into healthcare environments can create unanticipated or new problems and opportunities for medication error.
Design
Descriptive analysis of medication error reports.
Methods
This was a retrospective analysis of 359 incident reports drawn from the period of 1 May 2005–30 April 2006 across two hospital sites of a single not-for-profit private health service located in metropolitan Melbourne. Site A used a conventional pen and paper system for medication management, and Site B had introduced a computerised medication management system.
Results
Most medication errors occurred at the nurse administration (71·5%) and prescribing (16·4%) stages of delivery. The most common medication error type reported at Site A was omission (33%), and at Site B was wrong documentation (24·2%). A higher proportion of errors at the prescribing phase, and less nurse administration errors, were detected at Site B where the medication management system was in use. The incidence of other, less frequent errors was similar across the two hospital sites.
Conclusions
This examination of medication error reports suggests there are differences in the types of medication errors that are reported in association with the introduction of electronic medication management system compared to pen and paper system systems. The findings provide a new insight into the effects of introducing an electronic medication management system on the types of medication errors reported.
Relevance to clinical practice
The findings provide a new insight into the types of medication errors that are reported during implementation of an electronic medication management system. Extra support for physicians prescribing practices should be considered.

Effectiveness of an electronic inpatient medication record in reducing medication errors in Singapore

This study examined the effectiveness of an inpatient electronic medication record system in reducing medication errors in Singaporean hospitals. This pre- and post-intervention study involving a control group was undertaken in two Singaporean acute care hospitals. In one hospital the inpatient electronic medication record system was implemented while in another hospital the paper-based medication record system was used. The mean incidence difference in medication errors of 0.06 between pre-intervention (0.72 per 1000 patient days) and post-intervention (0.78 per 1000 patient days) for the two hospitals was not statistically significant (95%, CI: [0.26, 0.20]). The mean incidence differences in medication errors relating to prescription, dispensing, and administration were also not statistically different. Common system failures involved a lack of medication knowledge by health professionals and a lack of a systematic approach in identifying correct dosages. There was no difference in the incidence of medication errors following the introduction of the electronic medication record system. More work is needed on how this system can reduce medication error rates and improve medication safety. © 2013 Wiley Publishing Asia Pty Ltd.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of a hospital electronic medication management system

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of a hospital electronic medication management system (eMMS). METHODS: We compared costs and benefits of paper-based prescribing with a commercial eMMS (CSC MedChart) on one cardiology ward in a major 326-bed teaching hospital, assuming a 15-year time horizon and a health system perspective. The eMMS implementation and operating costs were obtained from the study site. We used data on eMMS effectiveness in reducing potential adverse drug events (ADEs), and potential ADEs intercepted, based on review of 1 202 patient charts before (n = 801) and after (n = 401) eMMS. These were combined with published estimates of actual ADEs and their costs. RESULTS: The rate of potential ADEs following eMMS fell from 0.17 per admission to 0.05; a reduction of 71%. The annualized eMMS implementation, maintenance, and operating costs for the cardiology ward were A$61 741 (US$55 296). The estimated reduction in ADEs post eMMS was approximately 80 actual ADEs per year. The reduced costs associated with these ADEs were more than sufficient to offset the costs of the eMMS. Estimated savings resulting from eMMS implementation were A$63-66 (US$56-59) per admission (A$97 740-$102 000 per annum for this ward). Sensitivity analyses demonstrated results were robust when both eMMS effectiveness and costs of actual ADEs were varied substantially. CONCLUSION: The eMMS within this setting was more effective and less expensive than paper-based prescribing. Comparison with the few previous full economic evaluations available suggests a marked improvement in the cost-effectiveness of eMMS, largely driven by increased effectiveness of contemporary eMMs in reducing medication errors.

Evaluating a medical error taxonomy

Healthcare has been slow in using human factors principles to reduce medical errors. The Center for Devices and Radiological Health (CDRH) recognizes that a lack of attention to human factors during product development may lead to errors that have the potential for patient injury, or even death. In response to the need for reducing medication errors, the National Coordinating Council for Medication Errors Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) released the NCC MERP taxonomy that provides a standard language for reporting medication errors. This project maps the NCC MERP taxonomy of medication error to MedWatch medical errors involving infusion pumps. Of particular interest are human factors associated with medical device errors. The NCC MERP taxonomy of medication errors is limited in mapping information from MEDWATCH because of the focus on the medical device and the format of reporting.