Medication safety in the perioperative setting: A comparison of methods for detecting medication errors and adverse medication events.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate perioperative medication-related incidents (medication errors (MEs) and/or adverse medication events (AMEs)) identified by 2 different reporting methods (self-report and direct observation), and to compare the types and severity of incidents identified by each method. We compared perioperative medication-related incidents identified by direct observation in Nanji et al's 2016 study[1] to those identified by self-report via a facilitated incident reporting system at the same 1046-bed tertiary care academic medical center during the same 8-month period. Incidents, including MEs and AMEs were classified by type and severity. In 277 operations involving 3671 medication administrations, 193 MEs and/or AMEs were observed (5.3% incident rate). While none of the observed incidents were self-reported, 10 separate medication-related incidents were self-reported from different (unobserved) operations that occurred during the same time period, which involved a total of 21,576 operations and approximately 280,488 medication administrations (0.004% self-reported incident rate). The distribution of incidents (ME, AME, or both) did not differ by direct observation versus self-report methodology. The types of MEs identified by direct observation differed from those identified by self-report (P = .005). Specifically, the most frequent types of MEs identified by direct observation were labeling errors (N = 37; 24.2%), wrong dose errors (N = 35; 22.9%) and errors of omission (N = 27; 17.6%). The most frequent types of MEs identified by self-report were wrong dose (N = 5; 50%) and wrong medication (N = 4; 40%). The severity of incidents identified by direct observation and self-report differed, with self-reported incidents having a higher average severity (P < .001). The procedure types associated with medication-related incidents did not differ by direct observation versus self-report methodology. Direct observation captured many more perioperative medication-related incidents than self-report. The ME types identified and their severity differed between the 2 methods, with a higher average incident severity in the self-reported data.

Direct Visualization of the Dural Puncture Site During Lumbar Spine Surgery Performed Under Spinal Anesthesia: A Case Report.

Spinal anesthesia (SA) has been utilized for lumbar surgical procedures; however, postdural puncture headache (PDPH) and subdural hemorrhage (SDH) are potential consequences. We present the case of a 76-year-old with progressive neurogenic claudication secondary to lumbar spinal stenosis who received SA for a 2-level lumbar posterior decompression. After decompression, the site of dural puncture from a 24-gauge Sprotte spinal needle was identified. Our intraoperative image demonstrates the submillimeter dural defect that can potentially engender complications as significant as PDPH and/or SDH. We recommend searching for, and preemptively sealing, the dural puncture site when SA is used for lumbar spine surgery.