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.^

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.^

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.

The relationship between leadership practices and a medication safety regime

Errors in healthcare are commonplace and have significant impact on mortality, morbidity, and costs. Other high-risk industries are credited with strong safety records. These successes are due in part to a strong, committed organizational culture and their leadership. A consistent pattern of effective leadership behaviors; creating change, establishing a vision and strategic actions, and enabling and inspiring the organization's members to act, is present in these high-risk industries. This research examined the relationship between leadership practices and a medication safety regime. The hypothesis is strong leadership practices have a positive relationship with the degree of sophistication of a medication safety program (safety performance). Leadership was used as a surrogate for organizational culture and was measured in this research through the Kouzes and Posner's Leadership Practices Inventory. The Institute of Medicine's 14 Selected Strategies to Improve Medication Safety was used to measure the development of a medication safety regime. Leadership practices towards safety were assessed by surveying 2,478 critical care Registered Nurses in the greater Houston area. A response rate of 19% was achieved. Thirteen hospitals participated in the medication safety regime assessment. Data from 386 RN respondents from 53 institutions provided an overall description of unit (ICU) and organization (hospital) leader's practices towards safety. There is some recognition of the medical error problem and that leaders exhibit moderate levels of leadership practices to promote safety. There were no differences noted in unit and hospital leaders' behaviors, with the exception that unit leaders promote change and enable staff to act more often than hospital leaders. There were no statistically significant relationships between overall leadership, or individual leadership practices and the organization's safety performance. There was a significant relationship between leadership and safety performance when other factors in organizational culture were considered. Teaching and Magnet hospitals also exhibited stronger behaviors towards safety. Organizational culture, as measured by academic affiliation and Magnet recognition, is strongly related to safety performance as measured by the degree of development of a medication safety regime. ^

Assessment of markers of medication literacy in a US-Mexico border community

Each year an estimated 180,000 people in the United States (U.S.) die as a result of medication errors, now considered a major public health problem. If a patient cannot correctly act on information related to medication use or "Medication Literacy" there is an increased potential for error. Medication use issues are unique on the US-Mexico border because they include high rates of herbal products and medication products from Mexico as well as issues related to the preferred language (English or Spanish) of the patient. To evaluate the medication literacy in a US-Mexico border community, this retrospective study evaluates 180 subjects representing four diverse economic segments of a metropolitan US-Mexico Border community who have taken a Medication Literacy Assessment. The assessment tool has been created to understand how patients interpret medication information for prescription, over-the-counter, herbal, and Mexican medication product use, and how they problem-solve medication questions. The Medication Literacy Assessment tool specifically assesses document literacy (e.g., prescription labels), prose literacy (e.g., patient leaflets), numeracy (e.g., calculations and measurements) as well as qualitative data related to medication use practices. The main hypothesis of this study is that the ability to interpret and use medications will vary based on education, language (Spanish or English), and recruitment sites (economically diverse communities). The results will provide information to better characterize medication use in a primarily Hispanic population on the US-Mexico border and may be used to influence policy decisions regarding prescription and over-the-counter product information.^

Errors in the administration of medication in inpatient hospitals: A systematic review of the research literature on commercial computerized physician order entry systems

Errors in the administration of medication represent a significant loss of medical resources and pose life altering or life threatening risks to patients. This paper considered the question, what impact do Computerized Physician Order Entry (CPOE) systems have on medication errors in the hospital inpatient environment? Previous reviews have examined evidence of the impact of CPOE on medication errors, but have come to ambiguous conclusions as to the impact of CPOE and decision support systems (DSS). Forty-three papers were identified. Thirty-one demonstrated a significant reduction in prescribing error rates for all or some drug types; decreases in minor errors were most often reported. Several studies reported increases in the rate of duplicate orders and failures to remove contraindicated drugs, often attributed to inappropriate design or to an inability to operate the system properly. The evidence on the effectiveness of CPOE to reduce errors in medication administration is compelling though it is limited by modest study sample sizes and designs. ^

An Extended Hierarchical Task Analysis for Error Prediction in Medical Devices

This paper introduces an extended hierarchical task analysis (HTA) methodology devised to evaluate and compare user interfaces on volumetric infusion pumps. The pumps were studied along the dimensions of overall usability and propensity for generating human error. With HTA as our framework, we analyzed six pumps on a variety of common tasks using Norman’s Action theory. The introduced method of evaluation divides the problem space between the external world of the device interface and the user’s internal cognitive world, allowing for predictions of potential user errors at the human-device level. In this paper, one detailed analysis is provided as an example, comparing two different pumps on two separate tasks. The results demonstrate the inherent variation, often the cause of usage errors, found with infusion pumps being used in hospitals today. The reported methodology is a useful tool for evaluating human performance and predicting potential user errors with infusion pumps and other simple medical devices.

Medical Error: Is the Solution Medical or Cognitive?

Is the solution for medical errors medical or cognitive? In this AMIA2001 panel on medical error, we argued that medical error is primarily an issue for cognitive science and engineering, not for medicine, although the knowledge of the practice of medicine is essential for the research and prevention of medical errors. The three panelists presented studies that demonstrate that cognitive research is the foundation for theories of medical errors and interventions of error reductions.

The physician's perception of medical error and its application to the development of an educational training tool.

It is becoming clear that if we are to impact the rate of medical errors it will have to be done at the practicing physician level. The purpose of this project was to survey the attitude of physicians in Alabama concerning their perception of medical error, and to obtain their thoughts and desires for medical education in the area of medical errors. The information will be used in the development of a physician education program.

EVALUATION OF INTENSITY MODULATED RADIATION THERAPY (IMRT) DELIVERY ERROR DUE TO IMRT TREATMENT PLAN COMPLEXITY AND IMPROPERLY MATCHED DOSIMETRY DATA

Intensity modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) is a technique that delivers a highly conformal dose distribution to a target volume while attempting to maximally spare the surrounding normal tissues. IMRT is a common treatment modality used for treating head and neck (H&N) cancers, and the presence of many critical structures in this region requires accurate treatment delivery. The Radiological Physics Center (RPC) acts as both a remote and on-site quality assurance agency that credentials institutions participating in clinical trials. To date, about 30% of all IMRT participants have failed the RPC’s remote audit using the IMRT H&N phantom. The purpose of this project is to evaluate possible causes of H&N IMRT delivery errors observed by the RPC, specifically IMRT treatment plan complexity and the use of improper dosimetry data from machines that were thought to be matched but in reality were not. Eight H&N IMRT plans with a range of complexity defined by total MU (1460-3466), number of segments (54-225), and modulation complexity scores (MCS) (0.181-0.609) were created in Pinnacle v.8m. These plans were delivered to the RPC’s H&N phantom on a single Varian Clinac. One of the IMRT plans (1851 MU, 88 segments, and MCS=0.469) was equivalent to the median H&N plan from 130 previous RPC H&N phantom irradiations. This average IMRT plan was also delivered on four matched Varian Clinac machines and the dose distribution calculated using a different 6MV beam model. Radiochromic film and TLD within the phantom were used to analyze the dose profiles and absolute doses, respectively. The measured and calculated were compared to evaluate the dosimetric accuracy. All deliveries met the RPC acceptance criteria of ±7% absolute dose difference and 4 mm distance-to-agreement (DTA). Additionally, gamma index analysis was performed for all deliveries using a ±7%/4mm and ±5%/3mm criteria. Increasing the treatment plan complexity by varying the MU, number of segments, or varying the MCS resulted in no clear trend toward an increase in dosimetric error determined by the absolute dose difference, DTA, or gamma index. Varying the delivery machines as well as the beam model (use of a Clinac 6EX 6MV beam model vs. Clinac 21EX 6MV model), also did not show any clear trend towards an increased dosimetric error using the same criteria indicated above.