60 resultados para medication errors
em BORIS: Bern Open Repository and Information System - Berna - Suiça
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: To analyse the frequency of and identify risk factors for patient-reported medical errors in Switzerland. The joint effect of risk factors on error-reporting probability was modelled for hypothetical patients. METHODS: A representative population sample of Swiss citizens (n = 1306) was surveyed as part of the Commonwealth Fund’s 2010 lnternational Survey of the General Public’s Views of their Health Care System’s Performance in Eleven Countries. Data on personal background, utilisation of health care, coordination of care problems and reported errors were assessed. Logistic regression analysis was conducted to identify risk factors for patients’ reports of medical mistakes and medication errors. RESULTS: 11.4% of participants reported at least one error in their care in the previous two years (8% medical errors, 5.3% medication errors). Poor coordination of care experiences was frequent. 7.8% experienced that test results or medical records were not available, 17.2% received conflicting information from care providers and 11.5% reported that tests were ordered although they had been done before. Age (OR = 0.98, p = 0.014), poor health (OR = 2.95, p = 0.007), utilisation of emergency care (OR = 2.45, p = 0.003), inpatient-stay (OR = 2.31, p = 0.010) and poor care coordination (OR = 5.43, p <0.001) are important predictors for reporting error. For high utilisers of care that unify multiple risk factors the probability that errors are reported rises up to p = 0.8. CONCLUSIONS: Patient safety remains a major challenge for the Swiss health care system. Despite the health related and economic burden associated with it, the widespread experience of medical error in some subpopulations also has the potential to erode trust in the health care system as a whole.
Resumo:
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.
Resumo:
Purpose The accuracy, efficiency, and efficacy of four commonly recommended medication safety assessment methodologies were systematically reviewed. Methods Medical literature databases were systematically searched for any comparative study conducted between January 2000 and October 2009 in which at least two of the four methodologies—incident report review, direct observation, chart review, and trigger tool—were compared with one another. Any study that compared two or more methodologies for quantitative accuracy (adequacy of the assessment of medication errors and adverse drug events) efficiency (effort and cost), and efficacy and that provided numerical data was included in the analysis. Results Twenty-eight studies were included in this review. Of these, 22 compared two of the methodologies, and 6 compared three methods. Direct observation identified the greatest number of reports of drug-related problems (DRPs), while incident report review identified the fewest. However, incident report review generally showed a higher specificity compared to the other methods and most effectively captured severe DRPs. In contrast, the sensitivity of incident report review was lower when compared with trigger tool. While trigger tool was the least labor-intensive of the four methodologies, incident report review appeared to be the least expensive, but only when linked with concomitant automated reporting systems and targeted follow-up. Conclusion All four medication safety assessment techniques—incident report review, chart review, direct observation, and trigger tool—have different strengths and weaknesses. Overlap between different methods in identifying DRPs is minimal. While trigger tool appeared to be the most effective and labor-efficient method, incident report review best identified high-severity DRPs.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND Double-checking is widely recommended as an essential method to prevent medication errors. However, prior research has shown that the concept of double-checking is not clearly defined, and that little is known about actual practice in oncology, for example, what kind of checking procedures are applied. OBJECTIVE To study the practice of different double-checking procedures in chemotherapy administration and to explore nurses' experiences, for example, how often they actually find errors using a certain procedure. General evaluations regarding double-checking, for example, frequency of interruptions during and caused by a check, or what is regarded as its essential feature was assessed. METHODS In a cross-sectional survey, qualified nurses working in oncology departments of 3 hospitals were asked to rate 5 different scenarios of double-checking procedures regarding dimensions such as frequency of use in practice and appropriateness to prevent medication errors; they were also asked general questions about double-checking. RESULTS Overall, 274 nurses (70% response rate) participated in the survey. The procedure of jointly double-checking (read-read back) was most commonly used (69% of respondents) and rated as very appropriate to prevent medication errors. Jointly checking medication was seen as the essential characteristic of double-checking-more frequently than 'carrying out checks independently' (54% vs 24%). Most nurses (78%) found the frequency of double-checking in their department appropriate. Being interrupted in one's own current activity for supporting a double-check was reported to occur frequently. Regression analysis revealed a strong preference towards checks that are currently implemented at the responders' workplace. CONCLUSIONS Double-checking is well regarded by oncology nurses as a procedure to help prevent errors, with jointly checking being used most frequently. Our results show that the notion of independent checking needs to be transferred more actively into clinical practice. The high frequency of reported interruptions during and caused by double-checks is of concern.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: Although critically ill patients usually have various central intravenous (i.v.) lines, numerous drugs have to be infused simultaneously through the same lines. This can result in potentially harmful in-line incompatibility that can cause decreased drug effectiveness or increased microparticle load. To minimize the risk of these medication errors at an anesthesia intensive care unit (ICU), the preparation and administration of continuously infused drugs were standardized and the practicability in daily clinical routine was evaluated. SUMMARY: The concentration and diluent of continuously administered i.v. drugs were standardized. The drugs were grouped according to pH, medical indication, and chemical structure. The ICU staff decided to use multilumen central venous catheters, and each group of drugs was assigned to one lumen. Only drugs that belonged to the same group were infused simultaneously through the same lumen; therefore, intragroup incompatibilities had to be excluded before establishing the new drug administration plan at the ICU. The visual compatibility of 115 clinically reasonable intragroup drug mixtures was investigated. All drug combinations were compatible for six hours except mixtures containing thiopental, which was reassigned to a single-line use. In the following year, the practicability of this drug administration plan was evaluated. No deviations were found in the compliance of the staff prescribing and preparing only standardized concentrations and diluents. Further research to investigate the chemical compatibility of the drugs in these multiple mixtures will follow. CONCLUSION: A project intended to avoid incompatibility among i.v. drugs infused in the intensive care setting included steps to standardize solutions and determine which could be given together.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES The aim of this study was to identify common risk factors for patient-reported medical errors across countries. In country-level analyses, differences in risks associated with error between health care systems were investigated. The joint effects of risks on error-reporting probability were modelled for hypothetical patients with different health care utilization patterns. DESIGN Data from the Commonwealth Fund's 2010 lnternational Survey of the General Public's Views of their Health Care System's Performance in 11 Countries. SETTING Representative population samples of 11 countries were surveyed (total sample = 19,738 adults). Utilization of health care, coordination of care problems and reported errors were assessed. Regression analyses were conducted to identify risk factors for patients' reports of medical, medication and laboratory errors across countries and in country-specific models. RESULTS Error was reported by 11.2% of patients but with marked differences between countries (range: 5.4-17.0%). Poor coordination of care was reported by 27.3%. The risk of patient-reported error was determined mainly by health care utilization: Emergency care (OR = 1.7, P < 0.001), hospitalization (OR = 1.6, P < 0.001) and the number of providers involved (OR three doctors = 2.0, P < 0.001) are important predictors. Poor care coordination is the single most important risk factor for reporting error (OR = 3.9, P < 0.001). Country-specific models yielded common and country-specific predictors for self-reported error. For high utilizers of care, the probability that errors are reported rises up to P = 0.68. CONCLUSIONS Safety remains a global challenge affecting many patients throughout the world. Large variability exists in the frequency of patient-reported error across countries. To learn from others' errors is not only essential within countries but may also prove a promising strategy internationally.
Resumo:
In clinical medicine, plane radiography is used for detecting the remains of medications in the stomach in oral medication intoxication cases. Since postmortem computed tomography (CT), performed prior to autopsy, is currently intensively entering the forensic routine, the technique was applied to three fatal cases of oral medication intoxication. Here we report CT and autopsy findings for these cases. In all three cases, hyperdense areas within the stomach content were documented. The measurement of Hounsfield Units (HU) beyond 74HU showed mean values of 338, 88 and 98HU. Postmortem CT also showed brain edema and pulmonary aspiration in one case. At autopsy, tablet remains in the stomach were detected microscopically in all three cases. The ex vivo CT scans of the ingested medicaments showed similar HU values. Despite the fact that further case studies are necessary beyond this one, and in spite of its limitations, postmortem CT was found to be a useful screening and documentation method for stomach contents in oral medication intoxication.
Resumo:
Antisaccade errors are attributed to failure to inhibit the habitual prosaccade. We investigated whether the amount of information about the required response the patient has before the trial begins also contributes to error rate. Participants performed antisaccades in five conditions. The traditional design had two goals on the left and right horizontal meridians. In the second condition, stimulus-goal confusability between trials was eliminated by displacing one goal upward. In the third, hemifield uncertainty was eliminated by placing both goals in the same hemifield. In the fourth, goal uncertainty was eliminated by having only one goal, but interspersed with no-go trials. The fifth condition eliminated all uncertainty by having the same goal on every trial. Antisaccade error rate increased by 2% with each additional source of uncertainty, with the main effect being hemifield information, and a trend for stimulus-goal confusability. A control experiment for the effects of increasing angular separation between targets without changing these types of prior response information showed no effects on latency or error rate. We conclude that other factors besides prosaccade inhibition contribute to antisaccade error rates in traditional designs, possibly by modulating the strength of goal activation.
Resumo:
Children with attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) show a marked temporal variability in their display of symptoms and neuropsychological performance. This could be explained in terms of an impaired glial supply of energy to support neuronal activity.
Resumo:
To explore oncology nurses' perceptions and experiences with patient involvement in chemotherapy error prevention.
Propagation of atmospheric model errors to gravity potential harmonics - impact on GRACE de-aliasing
Resumo:
Whether the use of mobile phones is a risk factor for brain tumors in adolescents is currently being studied. Case--control studies investigating this possible relationship are prone to recall error and selection bias. We assessed the potential impact of random and systematic recall error and selection bias on odds ratios (ORs) by performing simulations based on real data from an ongoing case--control study of mobile phones and brain tumor risk in children and adolescents (CEFALO study). Simulations were conducted for two mobile phone exposure categories: regular and heavy use. Our choice of levels of recall error was guided by a validation study that compared objective network operator data with the self-reported amount of mobile phone use in CEFALO. In our validation study, cases overestimated their number of calls by 9% on average and controls by 34%. Cases also overestimated their duration of calls by 52% on average and controls by 163%. The participation rates in CEFALO were 83% for cases and 71% for controls. In a variety of scenarios, the combined impact of recall error and selection bias on the estimated ORs was complex. These simulations are useful for the interpretation of previous case-control studies on brain tumor and mobile phone use in adults as well as for the interpretation of future studies on adolescents.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: To prospectively evaluate whether intravenous morphine co-medication improves bile duct visualization of dual-energy CT-cholangiography. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Forty potential donors for living-related liver transplantation underwent CT-cholangiography with infusion of a hepatobiliary contrast agent over 40min. Twenty minutes after the beginning of the contrast agent infusion, either normal saline (n=20 patients; control group [CG]) or morphine sulfate (n=20 patients; morphine group [MG]) was injected. Forty-five minutes after initiation of the contrast agent, a dual-energy CT acquisition of the liver was performed. Applying dual-energy post-processing, pure iodine images were generated. Primary study goals were determination of bile duct diameters and visualization scores (on a scale of 0 to 3: 0-not visualized; 3-excellent visualization). RESULTS: Bile duct visualization scores for second-order and third-order branch ducts were significantly higher in the MG compared to the CG (2.9±0.1 versus 2.6±0.2 [P<0.001] and 2.7±0.3 versus 2.1±0.6 [P<0.01], respectively). Bile duct diameters for the common duct and main ducts were significantly higher in the MG compared to the CG (5.9±1.3mm versus 4.9±1.3mm [P<0.05] and 3.7±1.3mm versus 2.6±0.5mm [P<0.01], respectively). CONCLUSION: Intravenous morphine co-medication significantly improved biliary visualization on dual-energy CT-cholangiography in potential donors for living-related liver transplantation.