Medication errors in hospitalised children

This study aims to explore the characteristics of reported medication errors occurring among children in an Australian children's hospital, and to examine the types, causes and contributing factors of medication errors.

Testing the validity, reliability and utility of the Self-Administration of Medication (SAM) tool in patients undergoing rehabilitation.

Determination of patients' ability to self-administer medications in the hospital has largely been determined using the subjective judgment of health professionals.

Comparison of medication policies to guide nursing practice across seven Victorian health services

Objectives The objective of this paper is to review and compare the content of medication management policies across seven Australian health services located in the state of Victoria. Methods The medication management policies for health professionals involved in administering medications were obtained from seven health services under one jurisdiction. Analysis focused on policy content, including the health service requirements and regulations governing practice. Results and Conclusions The policies of the seven health services contained standard information about staff authorisation, controlled medications and poisons, labelling injections and infusions, patient self-administration, documentation and managing medication errors. However, policy related to individual health professional responsibilities, single- and double-checking medications, telephone orders and expected staff competencies varied across the seven health services. Some inconsistencies in health professionals' responsibilities among medication management policies were identified. What is known about the topic? Medication errors are recognised as the single most preventable cause of patient harm in hospitals and occur most frequently during administration. Medication management is a complex process involving several management and treatment decisions. Policies are developed to assist health professionals to safely manage medications and standardise practice; however, co-occurring activities and interruptions increase the risk of medication errors. What does this paper add? In the present policy analysis, we identified some variation in the content of medication management policies across seven Victorian health services. Policies varied in relation to medications that require single- and double-checking, as well as by whom, nurse-initiated medications, administration rights, telephone orders and competencies required to check medications. What are the implications for practitioners? Variation in medication management policies across organisations is highlighted and raises concerns regarding consistency in governance and practice related to medication management. Lack of practice standardisation has previously been implicated in medication errors. Lack of intrajurisdictional concordance should be addressed to increase consistency. Inconsistency in expectations between healthcare services may lead to confusion about expectations among health professionals moving from one healthcare service to another, and possibly lead to increased risk of medication errors.

Medication knowledge and self-management by people with type 2 diabetes

Objective: To explore medication knowledge and self management practices of people with type 2 diabetes.

Design: A one-shot cross sectional study using in-depth interviews and participant observation.

Setting: Diabetes outpatient education centre of a university teaching hospital.

Subjects: People with type 2 diabetes, n=30, 17 males and 13 females, age range 33-84, from a range of ethnic groups.

Outcome measures: Ability to state name, main actions and when to take medicines. Performance of specific medication-related tasks; opening bottles and packs, breaking tablets in half, administering insulin, and testing blood glucose.

Results: Average medication use > or = 10 years. Respondents were taking 86 different medicines, mean 7 +/- 2.97 SD. Dose frequency included two, three and four times per day. All respondents had > or = 2 diabetic complications +/- other comorbidities. The majority (93%) were informed about how and when to take their medicines, but only 37% were given information about side effects and 17% were given all possible seven items of information. Younger respondents received more information than older respondents. Older respondents had difficulty opening bottles and breaking tablets in half. Twenty per cent regularly forgot to take their medicines. Increasing medication costs was one reason for stopping medicines or reducing the dose or dose interval. The majority tested their blood glucose but did not control test their meters and 33% placed used sharps directly into the rubbish.

Conclusion: Polypharmacy was common. Medication knowledge and self management were inadequate and could lead to adverse events.

Managing complex medication regimens: perspectives of consumers with osteoarthritis and healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND: Managing medications is complex, particularly for consumers with multiple coexisting conditions for whom benefits and adverse effects are unpredictable and health priorities may be variable.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate perceptions of and experiences with managing drug regimens from the perspectives of consumers with osteoarthritis and coexisting chronic conditions and of healthcare professionals from diverse backgrounds.

METHODS: Using an exploratory research design, focus groups were formed with 34 consumers and 19 healthcare professionals. Individual interviews were undertaken with 3 community medical practitioners.

RESULTS: Consumers' management of medications was explored in terms of 3 themes: administration of medications, provision of information, and the perceived role of healthcare professionals. In general, consumers lacked understanding regarding the reason that they were prescribed certain medications. Since all consumer participants had at least 2 chronic conditions, they were taking many drugs to relieve undesirable symptoms. Some consumers were unable to achieve improved pain relief and were reluctant to take analgesics prescribed on an as - needed basis. Healthcare professionals discussed the importance of using non-pharmacologic measures to improve symptoms; however, consumers stated that physicians encourage them to continue using medications, often for prolonged periods, even when these agents are not helpful.

CONCLUSIONS: Consumers were dissatisfied about the complexity of their medication regimens and also lacked understanding as to how to take their drugs effectively. Dedicated time should be devoted during medical consultations to facilitate verbal exchange of information about medications. Pharmacists must communicate regularly with physicians about consumers' medication needs to help preempt any problems that may arise. Instructions need to be revised through collaboration between physicians and pharmacists so that "as needed" directions provide more explicit advice about when and how to use such drugs. Future research, using large, generalizable samples, should examine trends related to consumers' experiences of symptomatic relief from chronic conditions and their understandings about medications.

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.

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.

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.

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.