Work Domain Analysis for understanding medication safety in care homes in England: an exploratory study

Medication safety and errors are a major concern in care homes. In addition to the identification of incidents, there is a need for a comprehensive system description to avoid the danger of introducing interventions that have unintended consequences and are therefore unsustainable. The aim of the study was to explore the impact and uniqueness of Work Domain Analysis (WDA) to facilitate an in-depth understanding of medication safety problems within the care home system and identify the potential benefits of WDA to design safety interventions to improve medication safety. A comprehensive, systematic and contextual overview of the care home medication system was developed for the first time. The novel use of the Abstraction Hierarchy (AH) to analyse medication errors revealed the value of the AH to guide a comprehensive analysis of errors and generate system improvement recommendations that took into account the contextual information of the wider system.

Systematic review of medication safety assessment methods

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.

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. ^

An interprofessional approach to improving paediatric medication safety

Safe drug prescribing and administration are essential elements within undergraduate healthcare curricula, but medication errors, especially in paediatric practice, continue to compromise patient safety. In this area of clinical care, collective responsibility, team working and communication between health professionals have been identified as key elements in safe clinical practice. To date, there is limited research evidence as to how best to deliver teaching and learning of these competencies to practitioners of the future.An interprofessional workshop to facilitate learning of knowledge, core competencies, communication and team working skills in paediatric drug prescribing and administration at undergraduate level was developed and evaluated. The practical, ward-based workshop was delivered to 4th year medical and 3rd year nursing students and evaluated using a pre and post workshop questionnaire with open-ended response questions.Following the workshop, students reported an increase in their knowledge and awareness of paediatric medication safety and the causes of medication errors (p < 0.001), with the greatest increase noted among medical students. Highly significant changes in students' attitudes to shared learning were observed, indicating that safe medication practice is learnt more effectively with students from other healthcare disciplines. Qualitative data revealed that students' participation in the workshop improved communication and teamworking skills, and led to greater awareness of the role of other healthcare professionals.This study has helped bridge the knowledge-skills gap, demonstrating how an interprofessional approach to drug prescribing and administration has the potential to improve quality and safety within healthcare.

Iowa Medication Safety and Effectiveness Statewide Strategic Plan, August 4, 2015

Improve the effectiveness, coordination, and safety of medication use in Iowa.

Predictors of health care professionals' attitudes towards involvement in safety-relevant behaviours

BACKGROUND Patients can make valuable contributions towards promoting the safety of their health care. Health care professionals (HCPs) could play an important role in encouraging patient involvement in safety-relevant behaviours. However, to date factors that determine HCPs' attitudes towards patient participation in this area remain largely unexplored. OBJECTIVE To investigate predictors of HCPs' attitudes towards patient involvement in safety-relevant behaviours. DESIGN A 22-item cross-sectional fractional factorial survey that assessed HCPs' attitudes towards patient involvement in relation to two error scenarios relating to hand hygiene and medication safety. SETTING Four hospitals in London PARTICIPANTS   Two hundred sixteen HCPs (116 doctors; 100 nurses) aged between 21 and 60 years (mean: 32): 129 female. OUTCOME MEASURES Approval of patient's behaviour, HCP response to the patient, anticipated effects on the patient-HCP relationship, support for being asked as a HCP, affective rating response to the vignettes. RESULTS HCPs elicited more favourable attitudes towards patients intervening about a medication error than about hand sanitation. Across vignettes and error scenarios, the strongest predictors of attitudes were how the patient intervened and how the HCP responded to the patient's behaviour. With regard to HCP characteristics, doctors viewed patients intervening less favourably than nurses. CONCLUSIONS HCPs perceive patients intervening about a potential error less favourably if the patient's behaviour is confrontational in nature or if the HCP responds to the patient intervening in a discouraging manner. In particular, if a HCP responds negatively to the patient (irrespective of whether an error actually occurred), this is perceived as having negative effects on the HCP-patient relationship.

'Saying it without words': a qualitative study of oncology staff's experiences with speaking up about safety concerns.

OBJECTIVES To explore the experiences of oncology staff with communicating safety concerns and to examine situational factors and motivations surrounding the decision whether and how to speak up using semistructured interviews. SETTING 7 oncology departments of six hospitals in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS Diverse sample of 32 experienced oncology healthcare professionals. RESULTS Nurses and doctors commonly experience situations which raise their concerns and require questioning, clarifying and correcting. Participants often used non-verbal communication to signal safety concerns. Speaking-up behaviour was strongly related to a clinical safety issue. Most episodes of 'silence' were connected to hygiene, isolation and invasive procedures. In contrast, there seemed to exist a strong culture to communicate questions, doubts and concerns relating to medication. Nearly all interviewees were concerned with 'how' to say it and in particular those of lower hierarchical status reflected on deliberate 'voicing tactics'. CONCLUSIONS Our results indicate a widely accepted culture to discuss any concerns relating to medication safety while other issues are more difficult to voice. Clinicians devote considerable efforts to evaluate the situation and sensitively decide whether and how to speak up. Our results can serve as a starting point to develop a shared understanding of risks and appropriate communication of safety concerns among staff in oncology.

Predictors of healthcare professionals' attitudes towards family involvement in safety-relevant behaviours: a cross-sectional factorial survey study.

OBJECTIVES To investigate predictors of healthcare professionals' (HCPs) attitudes towards family involvement in safety-relevant behaviours. DESIGN A cross-sectional fractional factorial survey that assessed HCPs' attitudes towards family involvement in two error scenarios relating to hand hygiene and medication safety. Each survey comprised two randomised vignettes that described the potential error, how the family member communicated with the HCP about the error and how the HCP responded to the family member's question. SETTING 5 teaching hospitals in London, the Midlands and York. HCPs were approached on a range of medical and surgical wards. PARTICIPANTS 160 HCPs (73 doctors; 87 nurses) aged between 21 and 65 years (mean 37) 102 were female. OUTCOME MEASURES HCP approval of family member's behaviour; HCP reaction to the family member; anticipated effects on the family member-HCP relationship; HCP support for being questioned about hand hygiene/medication; affective rating responses. RESULTS HCPs supported family member's intervening (88%) but only 41% agreed this would have positive effects on the family member/HCP relationship. Across vignettes and error scenarios the strongest predictors of attitudes were how the HCP (in the scenario) responded to the family member and whether an error actually occurred. Doctors (vs nurses) provided systematically more positive affective ratings to the vignettes. CONCLUSIONS Important predictors of HCPs' attitudes towards family members' involvement in patient safety have been highlighted. In particular, a discouraging response from HCP's decreased support for family members being involved and had strong perceived negative effects on the family member/HCP relationship.

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.

Appropriate Polypharmacy and Medicine Safety: When Many is not Too Many

The use of multiple medicines (polypharmacy) is increasingly common in middle-aged and older populations. Ensuring the correct balance between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs is a significant challenge. Clinicians are tasked with ensuring that patients receive the most appropriate combinations of medications based on the best available evidence, and that medication use is optimised according to patients’ clinical needs (appropriate polypharmacy). Historically, polypharmacy has been viewed negatively because of the associated medication safety risks, such as drug interactions and adverse drug events. More recently, polypharmacy has been identified as a risk factor for under-prescribing, such that patients do not receive necessary medications and this can also pose risks to patients’ safety and well-being. The negative connotations that have long been associated with the term polypharmacy could potentially be acting as a driving factor for under-prescribing, whereby clinicians are reluctant to prescribe necessary medicines for patients who are already receiving ‘many’ medicines. It is now recognised that the prescribing of ‘many’ medicines can be entirely appropriate in patients with several chronic conditions and that the risks of adverse drug events that have been associated with polypharmacy may be greatly reduced when patients’ clinical context is taken into consideration. In this article, we outline the current perspectives on polypharmacy and make the case for adopting the term ‘appropriate polypharmacy’ in differentiating between the prescribing of ‘many’ drugs and ‘too many’ drugs. We also outline the inherent challenges in doing so and provide recommendations for future clinical practice and research.