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.     

Emergency department patient knowledge of medications

Therapeutic decisions made by Emergency Physicians are often influenced by which prescribed medications are being taken by patients. We sought to assess Emergency Department (ED) patients’ knowledge of their medications by using a survey. A convenience sample of adult ED patients was surveyed verbally by a research assistant. Two-hundred patients were enrolled. Only 48% of patients could recall or produce a list or the actual bottles of all of their medications, 39% knew the times they take their medications, and only 24% knew all the dosages. Seventeen percent brought a list or the actual medication bottles with them to the ED. Patients who had a primary care physician knew all their medications 51% of the time, compared to 43% who did not have a physician. Fifty-one percent of insured patients compared to 38% of non-insured patients could identify all of their medications. Although knowledge of medications is often critical for decision making in the ED, a significant number of patients are unable to provide this information.     

Emergency Department Medication History Taking: Current Inefficiency and Potential for a Self-Administered Form

Background

Emergency Departments (EDs) struggle with obtaining accurate medication information from patients.

Objective

Our aim was to estimate the proportion of urban ED patients who are able to complete a self-administered medication form and record patient observations of the medication information process.

Methods

In this cross-sectional study, we consecutively sampled ED patients during various shifts between 8 am and 10 pm. We created a one-page medication questionnaire that included a list of 49 common medications, categorized by general indications. We asked patients to circle any medications they took and write the names of those not on the form in a dedicated area on the bottom of the page. After their visit, we asked patients to recall which providers had asked them about their medications.

Results

Research staff approached 354 patients; median age was 45 years (interquartile range 29–53 years). Two hundred and forty-nine (70%) completed a form, 61 (17%) were too ill, 19 (5%) could not read it, and 25 (7%) refused to participate. Excluding refusals, 249 of 329 (76%; 95% confidence interval 70–80%) were able to complete the form. Of 209 patients recalling their visit, 180 (86%) indicated that multiple providers took a history, including 103 in which every provider did so, and 9 (4%) indicated that no provider took a medication history.

Conclusions

The process of ED medication information transfer often involves redundant efforts by the health care team. More than 70% of patients presenting for Emergency care were able to complete a self-administered medication information form.     

National Emergency Department Overcrowding Study tool is not useful in an Australian emergency department

Objective: To determine the accuracy and usefulness of the National Emergency Department Overcrowding Study (NEDOCS) tool in an urban hospital ED in Australia by direct comparison with subjective assessment by senior ED staff. Method: A sample of simultaneous subjective and objective data pairs were collected six times a day for a period of 3 weeks. All senior medical staff in the ED answered a brief questionnaire along with the senior charge nurse for the ED. Simultaneously, the senior charge nurse also documented the total number of patients in the ED, the number of patients awaiting admission, the number of patients on ventilators, the longest time waited by an ED patient for ward bed, and the waiting time for the last patient from the Waiting Room placed on a trolley. The objective indicators were entered into a Web‐based NEDOCS tool and transformed scores were compared with the averaged and transformed subjective scores for each sample time. Bland–Altmann and Kappa statistics were used to test the agreement between the objective and subjective measuring methods. Results: The mean difference between the subjective and objective methods was small (3.5 [95% confidence interval ?0.875–7.878] ); however, the 95% limits of agreement was wide (?46.52–53.43). The Kappa statistic used to assess the extent of reproducibility between categorical variables was 0.31 (95% confidence interval 0.17–0.45). Conclusion: The present study suggests that NEDOCS method of processing the objective overcrowding data does not accurately reflect the subjective assessment of the senior staff working at that time in the ED. This might be because the assumptions of the original NEDOCS study are flawed.     

Medication Errors in the Management of Anaphylaxis in a Pediatric Emergency Department

Background

Despite the publication of recent guidelines for anaphylaxis management, many studies show that physicians are still not at ease with the management of anaphylaxis.

Objectives

To evaluate the rate and severity of medication errors before and after implementation of a standard order form for anaphylaxis management.

Methods

A before-and-after study was conducted. All children <18 years of age presenting to a tertiary care pediatric hospital Emergency Department with anaphylaxis between September 2007 and November 2010 were included. Patients were divided into two groups according to intervention (Pre and Post). Intervention consisted of the implementation of a standard order form (SOF) for anaphylaxis management. The post-intervention group was further sub-divided into SOF+ (when the SOF was used) and SOF− (when the SOF was not used).

Results

A total of 96 medical charts were reviewed. There were 31 patients in Pre and 65 in Post (29 in SOF+ and 36 in SOF−). A total of 243 drugs were ordered. Thirty-five percent (85/243) of these orders contained at least one medication error. Fifty-five percent (47/85) were dosage errors. The rate of medication errors was the same between Pre and Post (60% vs. 59%, p = 0.95). However, the rate of dosage errors was significantly reduced when the SOF was used (21% in SOF+ vs. 50% in Pre, p = 0.02 and 21% in SOF+ vs. 50% in SOF−, p = 0.02).

Conclusions

Medication errors in the management of anaphylaxis were frequent. Use of an SOF significantly reduced the rate of dosage errors.     

Model-based cost-effectiveness analysis of interventions aimed at preventing medication error at hospital admission (medicines reconciliation)

Rationale  Medication errors can lead to preventable adverse drug events (pADEs) that have significant cost and health implications. Errors often occur at care interfaces, and various interventions have been devised to reduce medication errors at the point of admission to hospital. The aim of this study is to assess the incremental costs and effects [measured as quality adjusted life years (QALYs)] of a range of such interventions for which evidence of effectiveness exists.
Methods  A previously published medication errors model was adapted to describe the pathway of errors occurring at admission through to the occurrence of pADEs. The baseline model was populated using literature-based values, and then calibrated to observed outputs. Evidence of effects was derived from a systematic review of interventions aimed at preventing medication error at hospital admission.
Results  All five interventions, for which evidence of effectiveness was identified, are estimated to be extremely cost-effective when compared with the baseline scenario. Pharmacist-led reconciliation intervention has the highest expected net benefits, and a probability of being cost-effective of over 60% by a QALY value of £10 000.
Conclusions  The medication errors model provides reasonably strong evidence that some form of intervention to improve medicines reconciliation is a cost-effective use of NHS resources. The variation in the reported effectiveness of the few identified studies of medication error interventions illustrates the need for extreme attention to detail in the development of interventions, but also in their evaluation and may justify the primary evaluation of more than one specification of included interventions.     

Emergency department visits: we are not prepared

Emergency department (ED) staff comments frequently about how patients are poorly prepared to answer important medical questions. To determine if the impression that patients were or were not prepared, a total of 309 patients were all asked a series of important medical questions and were graded as positive (or prepared) if they answered the question completely or negative (unprepared) if they partially answered, did not answer, or changed their answer during the ED stay. The patient population was older (mean age, 60 years) and was seen at 1 specialty hospital. Results indicated that many people were not prepared with information about their allergies, medications, medical and surgical histories, and some, even their physician's names. Patients were least prepared to know about an advance directive (79%) or to know their complete medical history (70%). Results indicated that most patients (99%) were not prepared to answer at least 1 or more important medical questions. The discussion considers why patients and others are not prepared for an ED visit and provides examples of ways to help people better prepare for such a visit.     

Emergency medicine in Poland

The article describes the feature of Poland's emergency medicine services system. Pre-hospital emergency medical service (EMS) access, regional differences and the main features of the system are described. EMS personal education and skill level are discussed. The authors offer a critical analysis of the current situation and proposal for the future development of emergency medicine in Poland based on changes in law, organization and education.     

Unscheduled Return Visits With and Without Admission Post Emergency Department Discharge

Background

Monitoring unscheduled return visits to the Emergency Department (ED) is useful to identify medical errors.

Objective

To investigate the differences between unscheduled return visit admissions (URVA) and unscheduled return visit no admissions (URVNA) after ED discharge.

Methods

From January 1, 2008 to March 31, 2008, URVA and URVNA patients who returned within 3 days after ED discharge were enrolled in the study. We compared the clinical characteristics, underlying diseases, ED crowding indicators, staff experience at the patient's first visit, and several other risk factors. We used multivariate logistic regression to evaluate differences between the two groups and to identify predictors of admission from unscheduled return visits.

Results

The unscheduled return visit rate was 3.1%. Of the 413 patients included, 147 patients (36%) were admitted, and had a mortality rate of 4.1%. The most common reason for the return visit was an illness-based factor (47.9%). Compared to URVNA patients, unscheduled return visit admissions had higher prevalence rates for old age, non-ambulatory status, high-grade triage, and underlying diseases (e.g., malignancy, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, coronary artery disease, heart failure, and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease). The independent predictors for URVA were: age ≥ 65 years (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 2.2, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.4–3.5); high-grade triage (adjusted OR 2.1, 95% CI 1.3–3.2); and doctor-based factors (adjusted OR 3.5, 95% CI 2.0–6.1). More advanced staff experience (p = 0.490) and ED crowding were not significant predictors (p = 0.498 for whole-day number of patients, p = 0.095 for whole-shift number of patients).

Conclusion

Old age, high-grade triage, and doctor-based factors were found to be significant predictors for URVA, whereas advanced staff experience and ED crowding were not.     

Intravenous medication errors in the emergency department,knowledge, tendency to make errors and affecting factors: An observational study

BackgroundIntravenous medication errors are common in hospital settings particularly emergency department. This study aimed to determine intravenous medication preparation and administration errors, contributing factors, tendency towards making errors and knowledge level of emergency department healthcare workers.MethodsA cross-sectional study using a structured, direct observation method was conducted. It was conducted with 23 emergency healthcare workers working in the emergency department of a university hospital in Turkey. Data were collected by questionnaires: Knowledge Test on Intravenous Medication Administration, Intravenous Drug Administration Standard Observation Form, Drug and Transfusion Administration Sub-Dimension scale, Perceived Stress Scale and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index.ResultsIt was determined that the knowledge level of the emergency healthcare workers about intravenous medication administration was moderate, and the tendency mistakes regarding drug and transfusion applications was very low. There was no relationship between education level, years of work, years of work in the emergency department, perceived stress level and sleep quality, and the tendency of making mistakes in drug and transfusion applications.ConclusionIt is important for patient safety to prevent medication errors by determining the factors affecting intravenous medication administration, tendency to make mistakes and knowledge levels, which are frequently used in emergency department.