Drug administration errors among anaesthesia providers in South Africa: a cross-sectional descriptive study.

BACKGROUND: Drug administration errors (DAEs) in anaesthesia are common, the aetiology multifactorial and though mostly inconsequential, some lead to substantial harm. The extend of DAEs remain poorly quantified and effective implementation of prevention strategies sparse. METHOD: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted using a peer-reviewed survey questionnaire, circulated to 2217 anaesthetists via a national communication platform. The aim was to determine the self-reported frequency, nature, contributing factors and reporting patterns of DAEs among anaesthesia providers in South Africa. RESULTS: Our cohort had a response rate was 18.9%, with 420 individuals populating the questionnaire. 92.5% of surveyed participants have made a DAE and 89.2% a near-miss. Incorrect route of administration, potentially resulting in serious harm, accounted for 8.2% (n = 23/N = 279) of these errors. DAEs mostly reported in cases involving adult patients (80.5%, n = 243/N = 302), receiving a general anaesthetic (71.8%, n = 216/N = 301), where the drug-administrator prepared the drugs themselves (78.7%, n = 218/N = 277), during normal daytime hours (69.9%, n = 202/N = 289) with good lightning conditions (93.0%, n = 265/N = 285). 26% (n = 80/N = 305) of DAEs involved ampoule misidentification, whilst syringe identification error reported in 51.6% (n = 150/N = 291) of cases. DAEs are often not reported (40.3%, n = 114/N = 283), with knowledge of correct reporting procedures lacking. 70.5% (n = 198/N = 281) of DAEs were never discussed with the patient. CONCLUSIONS: DAEs in anaesthesia remain prevalent. Known error traps continue to drive these incidents. Implementation of system based preventative strategies are paramount to guard against human error. Efforts should be made to encourage scrupulous reporting and training of anaesthesia providers, with the aim of rendering them proficient and resilient to handle these events.

Prevalence and factors associated with medication administration errors in the neonatal intensive care unit: A multicentre, nationwide direct observational study.

AIM(S): To determine the prevalence of medication administration errors and identify factors associated with medication administration errors among neonates in the neonatal intensive care units. DESIGN: Prospective direct observational study. METHODS: The study was conducted in the neonatal intensive care units of five public hospitals in Malaysia from April 2022 to March 2023. The preparation and administration of medications were observed using a standardized data collection form followed by chart review. After data collection, error identification was independently performed by two clinical pharmacists. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with medication administration errors. RESULTS: A total of 743 out of 1093 observed doses had at least one error, affecting 92.4% (157/170) neonates. The rate of medication administration errors was 68.0%. The top three most frequently occurring types of medication administration errors were wrong rate of administration (21.2%), wrong drug preparation (17.9%) and wrong dose (17.0%). Factors significantly associated with medication administration errors were medications administered intravenously, unavailability of a protocol, the number of prescribed medications, nursing experience, non-ventilated neonates and gestational age in weeks. CONCLUSION: Medication administration errors among neonates in the neonatal intensive care units are still common. The intravenous route of administration, absence of a protocol, younger gestational age, non-ventilated neonates, higher number of medications prescribed and increased years of nursing experience were significantly associated with medication administration errors. IMPLICATIONS FOR THE PROFESSION AND/OR PATIENT CARE: The findings of this study will enable the implementation of effective and sustainable interventions to target the factors identified in reducing medication administration errors among neonates in the neonatal intensive care unit. REPORTING METHOD: We adhered to the STROBE checklist. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: An expert panel consisting of healthcare professionals was involved in the identification of independent variables.

Analysis of the Incidence and Factors Influencing Medication Administration Errors Among Nurses: A Retrospective Study.

AIMS: To explore the incidence and factors influencing medication administration errors (MAEs) among nurses. BACKGROUND: Medication administration is a global concern for patient safety. Few studies have assessed the incidence of MAEs or explored factors that considered the interplay between behaviour, the individual and the environment. METHODS: This retrospective study included 342 MAEs reported in the electronic nursing adverse event reporting system between January 2019 and September 2023 at a university-affiliated teaching hospital in China. Data on nurses' demographics and medication administration were extracted from the nursing adverse event reports. The reports were classified according to the severity of patient harm. The causes of the 342 MAEs were retrospectively analysed using content analysis based on Bandura's social cognitive theory. Descriptive statistics were used to calculate the proportion of medication errors and the distribution of subcategories. RESULTS: In total, 74.3% of MAEs were adverse events owing to mistakes and resulted in no harm or only minor consequences for patients. Nurses aged 26-35 years and those with 6-10 years of experience were the most common groups experiencing MAEs. Factors influencing MAEs included personal ('knowledge and skills' and 'physical state'), environmental ('equipment and infrastructure,' 'work settings' and 'workload and workflow') and behavioural ('task performance' and 'supervision and communication') factors. The study further highlighted the interrelationships among personal, behavioural and environmental factors. CONCLUSION: Multiple factors influence MAEs among nurses. Nurse-related MAEs and the relationship between behaviours, individual factors and the environment, as well as ways to reduce the occurrence of MAEs, should be considered in depth. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Understanding the factors influencing MAEs can inform training programs and improve the clinical judgement of healthcare professionals involved in medication administration, ultimately improving patient prognoses and reducing MAEs. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The findings can help develop clinical guidelines for preventing MAEs.

EPERCAS study (Strategies for Preventing Medication Administration Errors in Nursing Homes). Preparation of a list of strategies to prevent the most frequent medication administration errors in the residential care environment.

Medication administration errors are one of the most frequent types of errors. There are different safety guides and recommendations to prevent medication errors generally directed to the hospital environment. However, specific recommendations for the management process in the residential care environment are lacking. The main objective of this study was to develop a list of recommendations to aid in preventing the most important medication errors that occur during the administration process in nursing homes (NHs), such as not administering doses or administering medication to the wrong patient. The effectiveness and feasibility of the strategies proposed were evaluated by a panel of experts. The conventional Delphi method was applied. The first round in our study was a face-to-face questionnaire; the second round included an online questionnaire based on the results of the first round. Finally, eight strategies were included in the EPERCAS List: one professional in charge per shift; one professional commissioned by the residential unit; avoid interruptions; avoid medication outside of meal times; personalized medication drawer for each resident including oral medication from a bag and laxatives, inhalers, syrups, eye drops, etc.; identification of the resident and their medication; visual check that everything has been administered; and signature to verify medication administration. The great continual challenge for NH is to define safe and affordable procedures. Minimum safety recommendations for administering the medications, such as those included in this study, should be employed. Our next stage is to implement these strategies in one of our NH and subsequently, evaluate its effectiveness and consider expanding it to the rest of the NH.

Nurses' perception of medication administration errors and factors associated with their reporting in the neonatal intensive care unit.

Medication administration is a complex process, and nurses play a central role in this process. Errors during administration are associated with severe patient harm and significant economic burden. However, the prevalence of under-reporting makes it challenging when analysing the current landscape of medication administration error (MAE) and hinders the implementation of improvements to the existing system. The aim of this study is to describe the reasons for the occurrence of MAEs and the reasons behind the under-reporting of MAEs, to determine the estimated percentage of MAE reporting and to identify factors associated with them from the nurses' perspective. This cross-sectional study was conducted using a validated self-administered questionnaire. The questionnaire contained 65 questions which were divided into three sections: (i) reasons for the occurrence of MAEs, which consisted of 29 items; (ii) reasons for not reporting MAEs, which consisted of 16 items; and (iii) percentage of MAEs actually reported, which consisted of 20 items. It was distributed to 143 nurses in the neonatal intensive care units of five public hospitals in Malaysia. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the factors associated with MAE reporting. The estimated percentage of MAE reporting was 30.6%. The most common reasons for MAEs were inadequate nursing staff (5.14 [SD 1.25]), followed by drugs which look alike (4.65 [SD 1.06]) and similar drug packaging (4.41 [SD 1.18]). The most common reasons for not reporting MAEs were that nursing administration focuses on the individual rather than looking at the systems as a potential cause of the error (4.56 [SD 1.32]) and that too much emphasis is placed on MAEs as a measure of the quality of nursing care (4.31 [SD 1.23]). Factors statistically significant with MAE reporting were administration response (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] = 6.90; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 2.01-23.67; P = 0.002), reporting effort (AOR = 3.67; 95% CI = 1.68-8.01; P = 0.001), and nurses with advanced diploma (AOR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.13-0.65; P = 0.003). Our findings show that under-reporting of MAEs is still common and less than a third of the respondents reported MAEs. Therefore, to encourage error reporting, emphasis should be placed on the benefits of reporting, adopting a non-punitive approach, and creating a blame-free culture.

Fatigue in nurses and medication administration errors: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Medication administration errors (MAEs) cause preventable patient harm and cost billions of dollars from already-strained healthcare budgets. An emerging factor contributing to these errors is nurse fatigue. Given medication administration is the most frequent clinical task nurses undertake; it is vital to understand how fatigue impacts MAEs. OBJECTIVE: Examine the evidence on the effect of fatigue on MAEs and near misses by registered nurses working in hospital settings. METHOD: Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework was used to guide this review and PAGER framework for data extraction and analysis. The PRISMA checklist was completed. Four electronic databases were searched: CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus and PsycINFO. Eligibility criteria included primary peer review papers published in English Language with no date/time limiters applied. The search was completed in August 2021 and focussed on articles that included: (a) registered nurses in hospital settings, (b) MAEs, (c) measures of sleep, hours of work, or fatigue. RESULTS: Thirty-eight studies were included in the review. 82% of the studies identified fatigue to be a contributing factor in MAEs and near misses (NMs). Fatigue is associated with reduced cognitive performance and lack of attention and vigilance. It is associated with poor nursing performance and decreased patient safety. Components of shift work, such as disruption to the circadian rhythm and overtime work, were identified as contributing factors. However, there was marked heterogeneity in strategies for measuring fatigue within the included studies. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Fatigue is a multidimensional concept that has the capacity to impact nurses' performance when engaged in medication administration. Nurses are susceptible to fatigue due to work characteristics such as nightwork, overtime and the requirement to perform cognitively demanding tasks. The mixed results found within this review indicate that larger scale studies are needed with particular emphasis on the impact of overtime work. Policy around safe working hours need to be re-evaluated and fatigue management systems put in place to ensure delivery of safe and quality patient care.

Hospital medication errors: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors (MEs) are among the most common types of incidents reported in Australian and international hospitals. There is no uniform method of reporting and reducing these errors. This study aims to identify the incidence, time trends, types and factors associated with MEs in a large regional hospital in Australia. METHODS: A 5-year cross-sectional study. RESULTS: The incidence of MEs was 1.05 per 100 admitted patients. The highest frequency of errors was observed during the colder months of May-August. When distributed by day of the week, Mondays and Tuesdays had the highest frequency of errors. When distributed by hour of the day, time intervals from 7 am to 8 am and from 7 pm to 8 pm showed a sharp increase in the frequency of errors. One thousand and eighty-eight (57.8%) MEs belonged to incidence severity rating (ISR) level 4 and 787 (41.8%) belonged to ISR level 3. There were six incidents of ISR level 2 and only one incident of ISR level 1 reported during the five-year period 2014-2018. Administration-only errors were the most common accounting for 1070 (56.8%) followed by prescribing-only errors (433, 23%). High-risk medications were associated with half the number of errors, the most common of which were narcotics (17.9%) and antimicrobials (13.2%). CONCLUSIONS: MEs continue to be a problem faced by international hospitals. Inexperience of health professionals and nurse-patient ratios might be the fundamental challenges to overcome. Specific training of junior staff in prescribing and administering medication and nurse workload management could be possible solutions to reducing MEs in hospitals.

Shift-to-shift nursing handover interventions associated with improved inpatient outcomes-Falls, pressure injuries and medication administration errors: An integrative review.

The aim of this integrative review was to identify which nursing handover interventions were associated with improved patient outcomes, specifically patients' falls, pressure injuries and medication administration errors, in the hospital setting. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement was used to guide the review. A systematic search of seven electronic databases was conducted, and retrieved articles were assessed by two independent reviewers. The quality of included studies was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. Eight studies met the inclusion criteria. The findings of this review indicate that improvements in handover communication had a clinically important positive effect on patient outcomes. Across the studies, reductions in falls varied from 9.3 to 80%, pressure injuries from 45 to 75%, and medication errors from 11.1 to greater than 50%. This review highlights that the implementation of bedside nursing handover and the adoption of standardized handover tools to improve nursing handover communication reduce patient adverse events, specifically falls, pressure injuries, and medication errors. These findings should be considered by clinicians to inform their clinical handover practice.

Evaluation of pharmacist-led educational interventions to reduce medication errors in emergency hospitals: a new insight into patient care.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors made by nurses are common in general practice and can lead to harm in patients. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of pharmacist-led educational implementations in reducing medication errors made by nurses in an emergency hospital in Cairo, Egypt. METHODS: A prospective pre-post-interventional study was conducted in an emergency hospital using direct observation for the detection of errors. The rate and severity of medication errors were determined before and after the implementation of educational tools. RESULTS: In total, 1025 and 1024 patients were examined pre- and post-intervention, respectively. Pharmacist interventions resulted in a significant reduction in the medication error rate from 351 (34.2%) in the pre-intervention phase to 157 (15.3%) in the post-intervention phase (P < 0.001). In both the pre- and post-intervention phases, none of the medication errors were associated with harm/death. Furthermore, all types of medication errors declined as a result of the interventions. CONCLUSION: Clinical pharmacists' interventions focusing on improving nurses' drug knowledge and awareness of errors were shown to be effective in reducing the rate and severity of medication administration errors among nurses in an emergency hospital environment.

Medication administration errors and contributing factors among nurses: a cross sectional study in tertiary hospitals, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.

BACKGROUND: Unsafe medication practices are the leading causes of avoidable patient harm in healthcare systems across the world. The largest proportion of which occurs during medication administration. Nurses play a significant role in the occurrence as well as preventions of medication administration errors. However, only a few relevant studies explored the problem in Ethiopia. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the magnitude and contributing factors of medication administration error among nurses in tertiary care hospitals, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 2018. METHODS: We conducted a hospital-based, cross-sectional study in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. The study involved 298 randomly selected nurses. We used adopted, self-administered survey questionnaire and checklist to collect data via self-reporting and direct observation of nurses while administering medications. The tools were expert reviewed and tested on 5% of the study participants. We analyzed the data descriptively and analytically using SPSS version 24. We included those factors with significant p-values (p ≤ 0.25) in the multivariate logistic regression model. We considered those factors, in the final multivariate model, with p < 0.05 at 95%Cl as significant predictors of medication administration errors as defined by nurse self-report. RESULT: Two hundred and ninety eight (98.3%) nurses completed the survey questionnaire. Of these, 203 (68.1%) reported committing medication administration errors in the previous 12 months. Factors such as the lack of adequate training [AOR = 3.16; 95% CI (1.67,6)], unavailability of a guideline for medication administration [AOR = 2.07; 95% CI (1.06,4.06)], inadequate work experience [AOR = 6.48; 95% CI (1.32,31.78)], interruption during medication administration [AOR = 2.42, 95% CI (1.3,4.49)] and night duty shift [AOR = 5, 95% CI (1.82, 13.78)] were significant predictors of medication administration errors at p-value < 0.05. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION: Medication administration error prevention is complex but critical to ensure the safety of patients. Based on our study, providing a continuous training on safe administration of medications, making a medication administration guideline available for nurses to apply, creating an enabling environment for nurses to safely administer medications, and retaining more experienced nurses may be critical steps to improve the quality and safety of medication administration.

Smart pumps improve medication safety but increase alert burden in neonatal care.

BACKGROUND: Smart pumps have been widely adopted but there is limited evidence to understand and support their use in pediatric populations. Our objective was to assess whether smart pumps are effective at reducing medication errors in the neonatal population and determine whether they are a source of alert burden and alert fatigue in an intensive care environment. METHODS: Using smart pump records, over 370,000 infusion starts for continuously infused medications used in neonates and infants hospitalized in a level IV NICU from 2014 to 2016 were evaluated. Attempts to exceed preset soft and hard maximum limits, percent variance from those limits, and pump alert frequency, patterns and salience were evaluated. RESULTS: Smart pumps prevented 160 attempts to exceed the hard maximum limit for doses that were as high as 7-29 times the maximum dose and resulted in the reprogramming or cancellation of 2093 infusions after soft maximum alerts. While the overall alert burden from smart pumps for continuous infusions was not high, alerts clustered around specific patients and medications, and a small portion (17%) of infusions generated the majority of alerts. Soft maximum alerts were often overridden (79%), consistent with low alert salience. CONCLUSIONS: Smart pumps have the ability to improve neonatal medication safety when compliance with dose error reducing software is high. Numerous attempts to administer high doses were intercepted by dosing alerts. Clustered alerts may generate a high alert burden and limit safety benefit by desensitizing providers to alerts. Future efforts should address ways to improve alert salience.

Analysis of Medication Errors and near Misses Made by Nursing Students.

Despite extensive research and technological advancements, errors related to medication administration continue to rise annually. The body of evidence surrounding medication errors has focused largely on licensed practicing nurses. Nursing students can offer a unique perspective regarding medication administration as their foundation for professional psychomotor skills and cognitive abilities are developed. The purpose of this study was to explore the variables related to medication errors made by pre-licensure nursing students. Data were collected from 2013-2015 in a pre-licensure program. Students completed a post-error survey available in Google Forms. One hundred thirteen responses to the error report were completed. By exploring the factors related to medication errors among nursing students, teaching and learning strategies forming the foundations of medication administration can improve professional nursing practice and improve safety and quality of care.

Association of medication administration errors with interruption among nurses in public sector tertiary care hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the association of medication administration errors with interruption among nurses working at public sector tertiary care hospitals in Karachi, Pakistan. METHODS: An analytical cross-sectional study was accomplished at two public sector healthcare facilities Civil Hospital, and Dow University Hospital, Karachi. The study was carried out from October 2017 to July 2018 over a period of 10 months. The sample was calculated by using OpenEpi version 3.0. By taking 56.4% of medication administration errors, 5% margin of error and 95% confidence level. The calculated sample size was 204 of both genders. The subjects both male and female nurses having a valid license from Pakistan Nursing Council and one year of clinical experience were enrolled in the study. The subjects were approached by using non-probability purposive sampling method. Validated and adapted questionnaire utilized to gather the data. Data was entered and analyzed by using SPSS version 21.0. RESULTS: In this study, total 204 nurses were included, almost half (52%) of them were male. Majority of (82.3%) study participants had age between 25-35 years old. There were total 716 medications given by 204 nurses. Out of these, 295 (41.2%) were antibiotics, other common medications were acid-suppressive, analgesic and antiemetic 14.5%, 15.9% and 11.2% respectively. Among all 716 medications, 644 (89.9%) were given intravenously whereas only 6.7% drugs given orally. A significant association has been found between medication administration errors and interruption like talking with other health care personnel, patients or attendant queries, phone calls (p-value=<0.001). Nearly 91% of the study nurses who were interrupted during medication committed medication errors. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that there is a significant association between medication administration errors with interruption among nurses.

Factors associated with medication administration errors and why nurses fail to report them.

BACKGROUND: Patient safety is a significant challenge facing healthcare systems. The administration of medication is pivotal to patient safety, and errors in drug administration are associated with mortality and morbidity. In this study, we assessed the factors contributing to the occurrence and reporting of medication errors from the nurse's perspective. METHODS: In this descriptive cross-sectional study, we distributed a validated questionnaire to 367 nurses at a large public hospital and obtained a response rate of 73.4%. The questionnaire comprised 65 questions, including 29 on the causes of medication errors, 16 on the reasons why medication errors are not reported and 20 that estimated the percentages of the different medication errors actually reported. Informed consent was obtained from all participants, and the anonymity and confidentiality of participants' information were preserved throughout the process. This study received institutional review board approval. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis. RESULTS: The main factors associated with medication errors by nurses were related to medication packaging, nurse-physician communication, pharmacy processes, nurse staffing and transcribing issues. The main barriers to the reporting of errors by nurses were related to the administrative response, fear of reporting and disagreements regarding the definitions of errors. CONCLUSION: Medication errors by nurses are related to medication packaging, poor communication, unclear medication orders, workload and staff rotation. To prevent medication errors, teamwork must be improved. All healthcare settings should emphasise awareness of the culture of safety, provide support and guidance to nurses and improve communication skills. We also recommend the use of integrated health informatics, including computerised drug administration systems. The limitations of this study include the potential for nonresponse bias associated with the sampling method. Further research is required to explore the complex and multidimensional causes of medication errors and review the responses of nurses regarding the errors reported.

Using the HALT model in an exploratory quality improvement initiative to reduce medication errors.

Medication errors can have deleterious effects on patient safety and care. Interruptions, patient acuity and time pressures have all been cited as contributing factors in the incidence of medication errors. Yet, despite the number of different strategies that can be taken to reduce the incidence of medication errors, they still occur. The strategies often focus on refining systems and processes, depending on the root cause of the error. However, less recognised as contributory elements are human factors such as anger, hunger or tiredness. The aim of this quality improvement initiative was to reduce medication errors by 25% on a medical ward, through the introduction of the hunger, angry, lonely, tired (HALT) model to address the human factors associated with medication errors. Post-implementation, the HALT model appeared to have resulted in a total reduction in medication errors over a 2-month period by 31%. Mistakes related to human error were reduced by 25%, and those linked to communication and documentation errors by 22%. While this was a small-scale study, this is a significant reduction in medication errors. However, caution should be used when addressing other contributing factors associated with medication errors as using HALT alone will not address these.

Pattern of medication errors among inpatients in a resource-limited hospital setting.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: There are limited studies on medication errors in South Asian and South East Asian regions. To bridge this gap, we assessed prescribing errors and selected medicine administration errors among inpatients, and the level of acknowledgement of prescribing errors by specialist physicians in a resource-limited hospital setting. STUDY DESIGN: The study was conducted in two medical wards of a hospital in Sri Lanka. Prescribing errors were identified among medicines prescribed in the latest prescription of randomly selected inpatients. Medical notes, medication histories and clinic notes were information sources. Consistency of medicine administration according to prescribing instructions was assessed by matching prescriptions with medicine charts. The level of acknowledgement of prescribing errors by specialist physicians of study wards was assessed by questionnaire. RESULTS: Prescriptions of 400 inpatients (2182 medicines) were analysed. There were 115 patients with at least one medication error. Among the 400 patients, 32.5% (n=130) were prescribing errors. The most frequent types of prescribing errors were 'wrong frequency' (10.3%, n=41), 'prescribing duplications' (10%, n=40), 'prescribing unacceptable medicine combinations' (6%, n=24) and 'medicine omissions' (4.3%, n=17). Medicine charts of 10 patients were inconsistent with prescribing instructions. Wrong medicine administration frequencies were common. The levels of acknowledgment of prescribing errors by the two specialist physicians were 75.5% and 90.9%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing and medicine administration errors happen in resource-limited hospitals. Errors related to dosing regimen and failing to document medicines prescribed or administered to patients in their records were particularly high.

Implementing smart infusion pumps with dose-error reduction software: real-world experiences.

Intravenous (IV) drug administration, especially with 'smart pumps', is complex and susceptible to errors. Although errors can occur at any stage of the IV medication process, most errors occur during reconstitution and administration. Dose-error reduction software (DERS) loaded on to infusion pumps incorporates a drug library with predefined upper and lower drug dose limits and infusion rates, which can reduce IV infusion errors. Although this is an important advance for patient safety at the point of care, uptake is still relatively low. This article discuses the challenges and benefits of implementing DERS in clinical practice as experienced by three UK trusts.

Bundle interventions used to reduce prescribing and administration errors in hospitalized children: a systematic review.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Bundle interventions are becoming increasingly used as patient safety interventions. The objective of this study was to describe and categorize which bundle interventions are used to reduce prescribing errors (PEs) and administration errors (AEs) in hospitalized children and to assess the quality of the published literature. METHODS: Articles published in English and Arabic between 1985 and September 2015 were sought in MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINHAL. Bibliographies of included articles were screened for additional studies. We included any study with a comparator group reporting rates of PEs and AEs. Two authors independently extracted data, classified interventions in each bundle and assessed the studies for potential risk of bias. Constituent interventions of the bundles were categorized using both the Cochrane Effective Practice and Organization of Care Group (EPOC) taxonomy of intervention and the Behavioural Change Wheel (BCW). RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria. All bundles contained interventions that were either professional, organizational or a mixture of both. According to the BCW, studies used interventions with functions delivering environmental restructuring (17/17), education (16/17), persuasion (4/17), training (3/17), restriction (3/17), incentivization (1/17), coercion (1/17), modelling (1/17) and enablement (1/17). Nine studies had bundles with two intervention functions, and eight studies had three or more intervention functions. All studies were low quality before/after studies. Selection bias varied between studies. Performance bias was either low or unclear. Attrition bias was unclear, and detection bias was rated high in most studies. Ten studies described the interventions fairly well, and seven studies did not adequately explain the interventions used. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: This novel analysis in a systematic review showed that bundle interventions delivering two or more intervention functions have been investigated but that the study quality was too poor to assess impact.

Nurses' attitude and intention of medication administration error reporting.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: The Aims of this study were to explore the effects of nurses' attitudes and intentions regarding medication administration error reporting on actual reporting behaviours. BACKGROUND: Underreporting of medication errors is still a common occurrence. Whether attitude and intention towards medication administration error reporting connect to actual reporting behaviours remain unclear. DESIGN: This study used a cross-sectional design with self-administered questionnaires, and the theory of planned behaviour was used as the framework for this study. METHODS: A total of 596 staff nurses who worked in general wards and intensive care units in a hospital were invited to participate in this study. The researchers used the instruments measuring nurses' attitude, nurse managers' and co-workers' attitude, report control, and nurses' intention to predict nurses' actual reporting behaviours. Data were collected from September-November 2013. Path analyses were used to examine the hypothesized model. RESULTS: Of the 596 nurses invited to participate, 548 (92%) completed and returned a valid questionnaire. The findings indicated that nurse managers' and co-workers' attitudes are predictors for nurses' attitudes towards medication administration error reporting. Nurses' attitudes also influenced their intention to report medication administration errors; however, no connection was found between intention and actual reporting behaviour. CONCLUSIONS: The findings reflected links among colleague perspectives, nurses' attitudes, and intention to report medication administration errors. The researchers suggest that hospitals should increase nurses' awareness and recognition of error occurrence. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Regardless of nurse managers' and co-workers' attitudes towards medication administration error reporting, nurses are likely to report medication administration errors if they detect them. Management of medication administration errors should focus on increasing nurses' awareness and recognition of error occurrence.

Medication administration errors from a nursing viewpoint: a formal consensus of definition and scenarios using a Delphi technique.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To develop and achieve formal consensus on a definition of medication administration errors and scenarios that should or should not be considered as medication administration errors in hospitalised patient settings. BACKGROUND: Medication administration errors occur frequently in hospitalised patient settings. Currently, there is no formal consensus on a definition of medication administration errors or scenarios that should or should not be considered as medication administration errors. DESIGN: This was a descriptive study using Delphi technique. METHODS: A panel of experts (n = 50) recruited from major hospitals, nursing schools and universities in Palestine took part in the study. Three Delphi rounds were followed to achieve consensus on a proposed definition of medication administration errors and a series of 61 scenarios representing potential medication administration error situations formulated into a questionnaire. RESULTS: In the first Delphi round, key contact nurses' views on medication administration errors were explored. In the second Delphi round, consensus was achieved to accept the proposed definition of medication administration errors and to include 36 (59%) scenarios and exclude 1 (1·6%) as medication administration errors. In the third Delphi round, consensus was achieved to consider further 14 (23%) and exclude 2 (3·3%) as medication administration errors while the remaining eight (13·1%) were considered equivocal. Of the 61 scenarios included in the Delphi process, experts decided to include 50 scenarios as medication administration errors, exclude three scenarios and include or exclude eight scenarios depending on the individual clinical situation. CONCLUSION: Consensus on a definition and scenarios representing medication administration errors can be achieved using formal consensus techniques. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Researchers should be aware that using different definitions of medication administration errors, inclusion or exclusion of medication administration error situations could significantly affect the rate of medication administration errors reported in their studies. Consensual definitions and medication administration error situations can be used in future epidemiology studies investigating medication administration errors in hospitalised patient settings which may permit and promote direct comparisons of different studies.