Using an alarm to improve drug trolley safety.

Leaving drug trolleys unlocked and unattended during drug rounds creates opportunities for drug theft and tampering. A new device was developed by our trust to detect when an open drug trolley is left unattended; it then sounds an alarm to remind staff to return to the trolley. This article describes use of the alarm on general hospital wards in one trust in the east of England. When the alarm was installed into drug trolleys on ahospital ward, it reduced the number of times unlocked trolleys were left unattended. The drug trolley alarm successfully changed the behaviour of staff on drug rounds and, in so doing, improved patient safety.

WireSafeTM - A pilot study of a novel safety engineered device designed to prevent guidewire retention and reduce sharps injuries during central venous catheter insertion.

Background: Guidewire retention and sharps injury during central venous catheter insertion are errors that cause patient and healthcare professional harm. The WireSafeTM is a novel procedure safety pack engineered to prevent guidewire retention and sharps injury during central venous catheter insertion. This is a pilot study aimed to determine its acceptability, usability and safety during clinical practice. Methods: An observational time and motion study was conducted comparing central venous catheter insertion and sharps disposal practice using standard versus WireSafeTM techniques. One-year following implementation, a structured survey was conducted to determine clinician opinion and experiences of using the WireSafeTM. Results: 15 procedures were observed using standard practice and 16 using the WireSafeTM technique. The WireSafeTM technique decreased the time taken from removal of the guidewire to disposal of sharps (standard 11.4 ± 5.6 min vs WireSafeTM 8.7 ± 1.4 min, p = 0.035), as well as total procedure time (standard 16 ± 7 min vs WireSafeTM 14.2 ± 2 min, p = 0.17), although this latter trend did not reach significance. Clinicians frequently practiced unsafe behaviour during sharps disposal in the standard group (53%), but when using the WireSafeTM technique, 100% exhibited safe practice by transferring sharps to the bin inside the sealed WireSafeTM box. One-year following implementation, 20 clinicians participated in the structured survey. Clinicians across three different departments used the WireSafeTM in varying clinical situations and reported that its use for central line insertion was either easier (10/20) or no different (10/20) compared to standard practice. All clinicians (20/20) felt that the WireSafeTM reduced the risk of guidewire retention and all stated that they approved of the WireSafeTM technique, and supported its use for convenience and safety benefits. Conclusion: Utilising the WireSafeTM for central line insertion facilitated earlier and safer sharps disposal, and the device was well supported by clinicians for its convenience and safety benefits.

Oral montelukast in acute asthma exacerbations: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Although leukotriene receptor antagonists have an established role in the management of patients with chronic asthma, their efficacy in an acute asthma exacerbation is not fully known. METHODS: 87 adults with acute asthma requiring hospitalisation were randomly assigned to receive either montelukast 10 mg or placebo on admission and every evening thereafter for 4 weeks (when they were reviewed as outpatients). All patients were admitted under the care of a consultant chest physician and received full care for acute asthma according to the British Thoracic Society guidelines. The primary end point was the difference in peak expiratory flow (PEF) between active and placebo treatment the morning following admission. RESULTS: Primary end point data were analysed for 73 patients. At study entry, patients who received montelukast (n=37) had a mean (±SD) PEF of 227.6 (±56.9) l/min (47.6% predicted) and those who received placebo (n=36) had a PEF of 240.3 (±99.8) l/min (49.6% predicted). The morning after admission, patients who received montelukast achieved a PEF of 389.6 (±109.7) l/min (81.4% predicted) compared with 332.3 (±124.9) l/min (69.8% predicted) for placebo (p=0.046). The mean difference between treatment groups was 57.4 l/min (95% CI of 1.15 to 113.6 l/min or 1.95-21.2% predicted). CONCLUSION: In acute asthma exacerbations the additional administration of oral montelukast results in a significantly higher PEF the morning after admission than that achievable with current standard treatment. Clinical trial number NCT01011452.