Frequency of pediatric medication administration errors and contributing factors

This study examined the frequency of pediatric medication administration errors and contributing factors. This research used the undisguised observation method and Critical Incident Technique. Errors and contributing factors were classified through the Organizational Accident Model. Errors were made in 36.5% of the 2344 doses that were observed. The most frequent errors were those associated with administration at the wrong time. According to the results of this study, errors arise from problems within the system.     

Medication errors and adverse drug events in an intensive care unit: direct observation approach for detection

OBJECTIVE: To determine the incidence and preventability of medication errors and potential/actual adverse drug events. To evaluate system failures leading to error occurrence. DESIGN: Prospective, direct observation study. SETTING: Tertiary care academic medical center. PATIENTS: Patients in a medical/surgical intensive care unit. INTERVENTIONS: Observers would intervene only in the event that the medication error would cause substantial patient harm or discomfort. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The observers identified 185 incidents during a pilot period and four phases totaling 16.5 days (33 12-hr shifts). Two independent evaluators concluded that 13 of 35 (37%) actual adverse drug events were nonpreventable (i.e., not medication errors). An additional 40 of the remaining 172 medication errors were judged not to be clinically important. Of the 132 medication errors classified as clinically important, 110 (83%) led to potential adverse drug events and 22 (17%) led to actual, preventable adverse drug events. There was one error (i.e., resulting in a potential or actual, preventable adverse drug event) for every five doses of medication administered. The potential adverse drug events mostly occurred in the administration and dispensing stages of the medication use process (34% in each); all of the actual, preventable adverse drug events occurred in the prescribing (77%) and administration (23%) stages. Errors of omission accounted for the majority of potential and actual, preventable adverse drug events (23%), followed by errors due to wrong dose (20%), wrong drug (16%), wrong administration technique (15%), and drug-drug interaction (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Using a direct observation approach, we found a higher incidence of potential and actual, preventable adverse drug events and an increased ratio of potential to actual, preventable adverse drug events compared with studies that used chart reviews and solicited incident reporting. All of the potential adverse drug events and approximately two thirds of the actual adverse drug events were judged to be preventable. There was one preventable error for every five doses of medication administered; most errors were due to dose omission, wrong dose, wrong drug, wrong technique, or interactions.     

Predictable and avoidable human errors in phlebotomy area - an exclusive analysis from a tertiary health care system blood bank

Error is a direct reflection of system deficiency. Errors occurring in the phlebotomy area are grossly unreported. Though most of these errors does not lead to catastrophic outcome yet indicate system failure. The aim of the study was to identify errors that took place in phlebotomy area, analysing and classifying them. A prospective audit was conducted during an observational period of 8 months, in an overall cohort of 11 260 donors. The incidence of errors was 3.1%. Fifty-five percent errors were technical and remaining 44.9% were clerical. Of all the technical errors, 57.7% were classified as minor, whereas remaining 42.3% were of major category. Similarly, majority of clerical errors (89.9%) were of minor category. The trained staff accounted for all major events (27.8%). In the minor category, technical errors (73.2%) were more commonly done by trained staff, whereas for clerical errors (58.5%), newly recruited staff was responsible. Errors in phlebotomy area are benign but can compromise donor safety. The study helped to develop a consistent and straightforward classification system for errors and to reduce them by basic interventions. Errors committed mostly by our trained staff indicate the need of regular competency testing and an active system for detection of these deviations.     

Quantification and classification of errors associated with hand-repackaging of medications in long-term care facilities in Germany

Objective: The aim of this study was to quantify and classify errors associated with the repackaging of residents' medications in long-term care facilities in Germany.Methods: This was a prospective 8-week study conducted in 3 long-term care facilities. Pill organizers, each of which contained all repackaged solid oral dosage forms of long-term medications for a particular resident for an entire day, were inspected and checked against residents' medication sheets by the investigator-pharmacist. On agreement between the pharmacist and the registered nurse responsible for residents' medications, all errors were rectified before medications were administered. The primary study measure was the overall rate of incorrectly repackaged medications relative to all repackaged medications. Secondary measures were the proportion of all pill organizers with medication errors and the proportion of residents who would have been affected by these errors. Errors were categorized by type as follows: wrong time of administration, wrong dose, wrong medication, omission of a medication, extra dose, incorrect halving of tablets, and damaged medication.Results: One hundred ninety-six residents were included in the study, representing 8798 daily pill organizers and 48,512 inspected medications. Residents received a mean of 5.4 solid oral dosage forms of long-term medications per day. Six hundred forty-five errors were detected, for an error rate of 1.3%; the errors involved 7.3% of daily pill organizers and 53.0% of residents. The largest proportion of errors involved incorrect halving of tablets (49.1%), followed by omission of a medication (22.0%), extra dose (9.8%), wrong time of administration (8.4%), damaged medication (6.4%), wrong dose (4.2%), and wrong medication (0.2%). These results may underestimate true rates of repackaging errors across long-term care facilities in Germany, as the conditions in the 3 facilities in this study were near-optimal in terms of the environment, process, and quality of repackaging.Conclusions: Among 48,512 medications inspected over 8 weeks in 3 German long-term care facilities, the rate of repackaging errors was 1.3%, involving 7.3% of daily pill organizers and the medications of 53.00% of residents. The largest proportion of errors involved incorrect halving of tablets.     

Medication errors resulting from drug preparation and administration

BACKGROUND: The risks associated with drug use are not confined to adverse reactions. Failures can occur in the process of drug prescribing, dispensing and administration. Such preventable events are termed 'medication errors'. Errors in preparation and administration, the last step in the medication process, constitute a good indicator of the quality of the medication process, and are irredeemable. METHODS: A protocol for measuring errors in the preparation and administration of medication has been developed and used in an internal medicine department at the University Hospital of Dijon. RESULTS: This protocol has enabled several different rates of medication errors to be determined depending on the calculation approach used: 15.1% with respect to interventions by nurses, 41% relating to the total number of opportunities for error, and 8.8% with respect to a methodological problem analysed in the study. The potential clinical significance, incidence and causes of errors during the medication process were also analysed. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION: Medical errors are not detected in our health system and are thus not preventable. Their consequences are incompatible with a well organised treatment process. The rate of medication errors is therefore a good indicator of the quality of the medication system in a hospital that is following the current steps for risk reduction and accreditation.     

Medication administration errors and the pediatric population: a systematic search of the literature

Medication administration errors are a serious concern for the pediatric population. This article presented an overview of medication errors and safe medication administration practices. Additional information was presented regarding the pediatric population and specific factors that make this population susceptible to medication errors. A systematic literature search on medication administration errors in the pediatric population was presented. From the search, five themes emerged, including the incidence rate of medication administration errors, specific medications involved in medication administration errors and classification of the errors, why medication administration errors occur, medication error reporting, and interventions to reduce medication errors.Differences in study design made it difficult to compare the articles with regard to some of the themes. However, it was apparent that medication administration errors do occur in the pediatric population, regardless of the exact incidence rate. As previously stated, the NCC MERP believes that there is no acceptable incidence rate for medication errors. Errors in dosage were found to be a common reason as to why medication errors occur. There was some discrepancy with regard to medication error reporting, as it was found that medication errors are underreported, but the extent of this varied. Systems used to report medication errors also varied. It was found that the more detailed the information reported on the medication error, the more potential impact it had on leading to a system change to prevent such errors from occurring again. It is recommended that reporting systems be nonpunitive so that nurses are not afraid to report errors. In addition, more emphasis should be placed on near miss medication errors, as these occur frequently but are rarely reported and may provide greater insight into system flaws. Lastly, interventions found to reduce medication administration errors were congruent with current recommendations for safe medication administration. This calls into question if the current recommendations are being followed uniformly. Implications for future research and practice include that a formalized system check for safe medication administration be developed and utilized. System checks have been developed and are widely used during the prescribing and preparing stage, and less medication errors are noted during this early part of the medication process. Having a formalized system check during medication administration would aid in ensuring that current recommendations are being followed, which would lead to a decrease in medication administration errors.Parents and caregivers naturally expect that their children will be safe when in the health care system. Yet, providing health care will always involve some degree of risk due to both the complexity of the health care environment and the role that human judgment plays within it. Nurses play a role in improving the safety of children within their care. The role of the nurse is much wider than simply reporting patient safety incidents or near misses; it includes taking preventative actions, sharing experiences, learning from mistakes, and helping to devise solutions.     

Antibiotic and O2 omissions and errors in hospitalized patients

The aim was to investigate medication errors regarding antibiotic and oxygen therapy in 2 different hospital types, respiratory versus general, in Greece. Oxygen and antibiotic errors were 27.4% and 16.9%, respectively. Errors by physicians and nurses were nearly the same type and rates. Oxygen errors were significantly higher in the General Hospital. The study confirmed that medication processes should be reevaluated to prevent medication errors, and educational programs and protocols should be used.     

National study on the frequency, types, causes, and consequences of voluntarily reported emergency department medication errors

Background: Medication errors contribute to significant morbidity, mortality, and costs to the health system. Little is known about the characteristics of Emergency Department (ED) medication errors. Study Objective: To examine the frequency, types, causes, and consequences of voluntarily reported ED medication errors in the United States. Methods: A cross-sectional study of all ED errors reported to the MEDMARX system between 2000 and 2004. MEDMARX is an anonymous, confidential, de-identified, Internet-accessible medication error-reporting program designed to allow hospitals to report, track, and share error data in a standardized format. Results: There were 13,932 medication errors from 496 EDs analyzed. The error rate was 78 reports per 100,000 visits. Physicians were responsible for 24% of errors, nurses for 54%. Errors most commonly occurred in the administration phase (36%). The most common type of error was improper dose/quantity (18%). Leading causes were not following procedure/protocol (17%), and poor communication (11%), whereas contributing factors were distractions (7.5%), emergency situations (4.1%), and workload increase (3.4%). Computerized provider order entry caused 2.5% of errors. Harm resulted in 3% of errors. Actions taken as a result of the error included informing the staff member who committed the error (26%), enhancing communication (26%), and providing additional training (12%). Patients or family members were notified about medication errors 2.7% of the time. Conclusion: ED medication errors may be a result of the acute, crowded, and fast-paced nature of care. Further research is needed to identify interventions to reduce these risks and evaluate the effectiveness of these interventions.     

Repeat medication errors in nursing homes: Contributing factors and their association with patient harm

Background: Medication errors are highly prevalent in long-term care facilities and are responsible for preventable injury. Repeat medication errors, or identical events occurring multiple times in the same patient, may be particularly preventable.Objectives: This study assessed the factors that contribute to repeat medication errors and the association between repeat medication errors and patient harm.Methods: In this cross-sectional analysis, medication error reports submitted by licensed nursing homes to North Carolina's Medication Error Quality Initiative-Individual Error Web-based incident reporting system were analyzed for fiscal years 2006–2008. When reporting errors, the sites were asked whether the event was identically repeated within the same patient. Repeat medication errors were defined as identical events in terms of patient characteristics, drug involved, error type, potential cause, phase of the medication care process, and personnel involved. Repeat errors were compared with nonrepeat errors. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore whether certain patient or error characteristics were related to a higher likelihood of repeat errors, and a similar analysis was used to explore whether repeat errors were related to patient harm.Results: Of the total 15,037 errors reported by 294 unique nursing homes, 5615 (37.3%) were repeated one or more times. Among the repeat errors, the associated event within each error was repeated a mean (SD) of 10.7 (14.3) times. Wrong dosage (65.1% [3654/5615]) and wrong administration (10.2% [571/5615]) were the most frequent repeated events. In multivariate analysis, repeat errors occurred less frequently among younger residents (aged <75 years) than among older residents (aged ≥75 years) (odds ratio [OR] = 0.85; 95% CI, 0.79–0.93) and among residents able to direct their own care compared with cognitively impaired residents (OR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.81–0.95). Patient harm was reported in only 1.2% (68/5615) of repeat errors and 0.6% (55/9422) of non-repeat errors. A multivariate analysis of patient harm found that repeat errors were more likely to be harmful than were nonrepeat errors (OR = 2.11; 95% CI, 1.43–3.11).Conclusions: Repeat medication errors in nursing homes are a common occurrence and have greater odds of being associated with harm than do nonrepeat errors. Future patient-safety research should focus on factors related to repeat errors.     

Harmful medication errors in children: a 5-year analysis of data from the USP's MEDMARX program

Harmful pediatric medication errors are common in hospitals and health systems. Understanding what products are involved in these errors is important in the prevention of future errors. We used data from a voluntary medication error reporting system (MEDMARX) and identified 816 harmful outcomes involving 242 medications during a 5-year period. Eleven medications accounted for more than one third of reported errors (n = 261 or 34.5%). Wrong dosing and omission errors were common and were associated with therapeutic classes such as opioid analgesics (e.g., morphine and fentanyl), antimicrobial agents (e.g., vancomycin and gentamicin), and antidiabetic agents (e.g., insulin). Older commonly used agents still resulted in a substantial number of harmful pediatric medication errors and should be included in the focus of patient safety activities.     

D IAGNOSIS AND T RIAGE BY EMS P ROFESSIONALS

Abstract

Background. Systematic evaluation of the performances of prehospital providers during actual pediatric anaphylaxis cases has never been reported. Epinephrine medication errors in pediatric resuscitation are common, but the root causes of these errors are not fully understood. Objective. The primary objective of this study was to identify underlying causes of prehospital medication errors that were observed during a simulated pediatric anaphylaxis reaction. Methods. Two- and 4-person emergency medical services crews from eight geographically diverse agencies participated in a 20-minute simulation of a 5-year old child with progressive respiratory distress and hypotension from an anaphylactic reaction. Crews used their own equipment and drugs. A checklist-based scoring protocol was developed to help identify errors. A trained facilitator conducted a structured debriefing, supplemented by playback of video recordings, immediately after the simulated event to elicit underlying causes of errors. Errors were analyzed with mixed quantitative and qualitative methods. Results. One hundred forty-two subjects participated in 62 simulation sessions. Ninety-five percent of crews (59/62) gave epinephrine, but 27 of those crews (46%) delivered the correct dose of epinephrine in an appropriate concentration and route. Twelve crews (20%) gave a dose that was ≥5 times the correct dose; 8 crews (14%) bolused epinephrine intravenously. Among the 55 crews who gave diphenhydramine, 4 delivered the protocol-based dose. Three crews provided an intravenous steroid, and 1 used the protocol-based dose. Underlying causes of errors were categorized into eight themes: faulty reasoning, weight estimation errors, faulty recall of medication dosages, problematic references, calculation errors, dose estimation, communication errors, and medication delivery errors. Conclusion. Simulation, followed by a structured debriefing, identified multiple, underlying causes of medication errors in the prehospital management of pediatric anaphylactic reactions. Sequential and synergistic errors were observed with epinephrine delivery.     

An observational study of drug administration errors in a Malaysian hospital (study of drug administration errors)

Background and objective: Drug administration errors were the second most frequent type of medication errors, after prescribing errors but the latter were often intercepted hence, administration errors were more probably to reach the patients. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the frequency and types of drug administration errors in a Malaysian hospital ward. Methods: This is a prospective study that involved direct, undisguised observations of drug administrations in a hospital ward. A researcher was stationed in the ward under study for 15 days to observe all drug administrations which were recorded in a data collection form and then compared with the drugs prescribed for the patient. Results: A total of 1118 opportunities for errors were observed and 127 administrations had errors. This gave an error rate of 11·4 % [95% confidence interval (CI) 9·5–13·3]. If incorrect time errors were excluded, the error rate reduced to 8·7% (95% CI 7·1–10·4). The most common types of drug administration errors were incorrect time (25·2%), followed by incorrect technique of administration (16·3%) and unauthorized drug errors (14·1%). In terms of clinical significance, 10·4% of the administration errors were considered as potentially life‐threatening. Intravenous routes were more likely to be associated with an administration error than oral routes (21·3% vs. 7·9%, P < 0·001). Conclusion: The study indicates that the frequency of drug administration errors in developing countries such as Malaysia is similar to that in the developed countries. Incorrect time errors were also the most common type of drug administration errors. A non‐punitive system of reporting medication errors should be established to encourage more information to be documented so that risk management protocol could be developed and implemented.     

Identifying errors and safety considerations in patients undergoing thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke

Background & purposeAlteplase is the standard of care for early pharmacologic thrombolysis after acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Alteplase is also considered a high-alert medication and is fraught with potential for error. We sought to describe the difference in medication error rates in in patients receiving alteplase for acute ischemic stroke from regional hospitals compared to patients receiving alteplase at the Comprehensive Stroke Center.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort comparison of patients who were greater than 18 years old that received intravenous alteplase for the treatment of AIS from June 2015 to June 2018. Several institution specific databases were utilized to obtain pertinent data. A standardized taxonomy was utilized to classify medication errors. Patients were excluded if they received any fibrinolytic other than alteplase or if alteplase was used for a non-stroke indication. Two cohorts (from regional hospitals or the Comprehensive Stroke Center (CSC)) were compared.ResultsA total of 676 patients received alteplase during the study period (34% from the CSC and 66% from regional hospitals). There were 133 (19.8%) errors identified. Ten errors (1.6%) occurred at the CSC and 123 (18.2%) errors occurred at regional hospitals. More patients who had an error with alteplase administration (12.7%) experienced a hemorrhagic conversion compared to those with no error in administration (7.2%, p = 0.04).ConclusionThe error rate of alteplase infusion for ischemic stroke is high, particularly in patients from referring centers. Errors may be associated with adverse events. Further education and administration safeguards should be implemented to decrease the risk of medication errors.     

Tenfold medication dose prescribing errors

BACKGROUND: Tenfold errors in medication dosing continue to occur despite being a well-recognized risk, particularly to pediatric patients. Few systematic evaluations of the characteristics and causes of tenfold medication dosage prescribing errors have been performed. OBJECTIVE: To identify and quantify the characteristics of tenfold medication dosage prescribing errors. DESIGN: Evaluation of 200 consecutively detected medication orders with tenfold errors in dosing in a 631-bed tertiary-care teaching hospital. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Type, frequency, characteristics, causes, enabling factors, and potential for adverse effects of tenfold medication dosage prescribing errors. RESULTS: Two hundred cases of tenfold prescribing errors were detected over an 18-month period. Overdoses were prescribed in 61% of the cases and underdoses in 39% of the cases. Ninety (45%) of the errors were rated as potentially serious or severe; 19.5% of the errors ocurred in pediatric patients. Levothyroxine accounted for 19% of all errors. As a class, antimicrobials, cardiovascular agents, and central nervous system agents each accounted for > or =15% of errors. Errors were associated with multiple zeroes in the dose (45%), use of equations or calculations to determine dose (27% total cases, 92.3% of pediatric cases), dose amount less than 1 (25%), and expression of measure conversion (23%). The tenfold errors were produced by a misplaced decimal point in 87 cases (43.5%), adding an extra zero in 63 cases (31.5%), and omitting a zero in 50 cases (25%). Factors identified as enabling a tenfold error to be carried out as ordered were a wide dose range for the drug (76.5%), medication ordered and able to be given by injection (42%), ability to give ordered dose as < or =5 solid oral dosage forms (36%), and availability of an oral liquid dose form (15%). CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing of tenfold medication dose errors is common and is associated with identifiable risk factors. Implementing commonly recommended medication safety processes are likely to reduce risk to patients from such errors. This information should be considered in the development of strategies to prevent adverse patient outcomes resulting from such errors.     

Medication errors and professional practice of registered nurses

This Australian study identified and described the incidence of medication errors among registered nurses, the type and causes of these errors and the impact that administration of medications has on the professional practice of registered nurses. Mostly, medication errors were attributed to documentation issues, including: illegible handwriting, misunderstanding abbreviations, misplaced decimal point, misreading and misinterpreting written orders. Several human factors were attributed to potential causes of medication errors, including: stress, fatigue, knowledge and skill deficits. Environmental factors, namely, interruptions and distractions during the administration of medications, were also attributed to potential errors. The study found professional nursing practice involving administration of medications had a strong education, patient and ethical focus. Over a quarter of the respondents indicated that further training in medication administration would positively impact on their nursing practice. The registered nurses also highlighted they would appreciate more time to spend with patients when administering medications. Medication errors are not the sole responsibility of any single professional group, therefore, collaboration with other health professionals is central to establishing processes, policies, strategies and systems that will reduce their occurrence. The organisation and those nurses employed within it share an accountability to ensure safe administration of medications to patients. Based on study results, several recommendations are directed towards preventing or reducing medication errors and supporting nurses in providing best practice.     

The impact of type of manual medication cart filling method on the frequency of medication administration errors: a prospective before and after study

Background

The medication cart can be filled using an automated system or a manual method and when using a manual method the medication can be arranged either by round time or by medication name. For the manual methods, it is hypothesized that the latter method would result in a lower frequency of medication administration errors because nurses are forced to read the medication labels, but evidence for this hypothesis is lacking.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare the frequency of medication administration errors of two different manual medication cart filling methods, namely arranging medication by round time or by medication name.

Design

A prospective, observational study with a before-after design.

Participants and settings

Eighty-six patients who stayed on an orthopaedic ward in one university medical centre in the Netherlands were included.

Methods

Disguised observation was used to detect medication administration errors. The medication cart filling method in usual care was to fill the cart with medication arranged by round time. The intervention was the implementation of the second medication cart filling method, where the medication cart was filled by arranging medicines by their names. The primary outcome was the frequency of medication administrations with one or more error(s) after the intervention compared with before the intervention. The secondary outcome was the frequency of subtypes of medication administration errors.

Results

After the intervention 170 of 740 (23.0%) medication administrations with one or more medication administration error(s) were observed compared to 114 of 589 (19.4%) before the intervention (odds ratio 1.24 [95% confidence interval 0.95-1.62]). The distribution of subtypes of medication administration errors before and after the intervention was statistically significantly different (p < 0.001). Analysis of subtypes revealed more omissions and wrong time errors after the intervention than before the intervention. Unauthorized medication errors were detected more frequently before the intervention than after the intervention.

Conclusion

The frequency of medication administration errors with the medication cart filling method where the medication is arranged by name was not statistically significantly different compared to the medication cart filling method where the medication is arranged by round time.