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.

The Rate of Infusion Represents an Important Aspect of Administering Anticancer Agents.

Background: Infusion rate is one of the essential elements that should be included in all intravenous orders. Patients may experience adverse consequences or risks associated with inappropriate infusion. Meanwhile, there is growing pressure on the chemotherapy unit to deliver treatment quickly, efficiently, and safely, and thus it is very necessary to improve the chemotherapy process and service to cancer patients. Clinicians should consider how to further standardize infusion therapy, and innovate new infusion strategies to increase efficacy, reduce toxicity, improve patient satisfaction and save health resource costs. Sporadic studies have evaluated the effects of infusion rates of anticancer agents on clinical outcomes, economic benefits, and administration efficiency. However, an update review has not been available. Methods: Relevant literature was identified by search of PubMed until September 2023. Results: Infusion rates may have significant effect on the efficacy of anticancer agents (e.g., methotrexate, fluorouracil, and arsenic trioxide). Slow infusion is safer for platinum compounds, doxorubicin and carmustine, whereas fast infusion is safer than slow infusion of gemcitabine. Optimal flow rates of paclitaxel and fluorouracil are based on the balance between multiple risks of toxicity. Optimal infusion rate may bring economic benefits. If efficacy and safety are not compromised, shortened infusion may result in higher patient satisfaction, improved institutional efficiency and more nursing time available for other activities (e.g., biosimilar products, endostar). Other concerns about infusion rate include clinical indications (eg, paclitaxel and rituximab, methotrexate), severity and type of hypersensitivity reactions (e.g., platinum compounds), formulation features (e.g., paclitaxel, doxorubicin), and genetic polymorphism (e.g., gemcitabine, methotrexate). Conclusion: The latest knowledge of infusion rate concerns will enhance the appropriateness and accuracy in intravenous administration. Interdisciplinary teams should collaborate and implement relevant risk management and healthcare policy. It is worthwhile to conduct comparative studies of intravenous therapy with different infusion speeds.

Closed-Loop Medication Management with an Electronic Health Record System in U.S. and Finnish Hospitals.

Many medication errors in the hospital setting are due to manual, error-prone processes in the medication management system. Closed-loop Electronic Medication Management Systems (EMMSs) use technology to prevent medication errors by replacing manual steps with automated, electronic ones. As Finnish Helsinki University Hospital (HUS) establishes its first closed-loop EMMS with the new Epic-based Electronic Health Record system (APOTTI), it is helpful to consider the history of a more mature system: that of the United States. The U.S. approach evolved over time under unique policy, economic, and legal circumstances. Closed-loop EMMSs have arrived in many U.S. hospital locations, with myriad market-by-market manifestations typical of the U.S. healthcare system. This review describes and compares U.S. and Finnish hospitals' EMMS approaches and their impact on medication workflows and safety. Specifically, commonalities and nuanced differences in closed-loop EMMSs are explored from the perspectives of the care/nursing unit and hospital pharmacy operations perspectives. As the technologies are now fully implemented and destined for evolution in both countries, perhaps closed-loop EMMSs can be a topic of continued collaboration between the two countries. This review can also be used for benchmarking in other countries developing closed-loop EMMSs.

Reasons for medication administration errors, barriers to reporting them and the number of reported medication administration errors from the perspective of nurses: A cross-sectional survey.

The aim of the study was to identify the reasons for medication administration errors, describe the barriers in their reporting and estimate the number of reported medication administration errors. BACKGROUND: Providing quality and safe healthcare is a key priority for all health systems. Medication administration error belongs to the more common mistakes committed in nursing practice. Prevention of medication administration errors must therefore be an integral part of nursing education. DESIGN: A descriptive and cross-sectional design was used for this study. METHODS: Sociological representative research was carried out using the standardized Medication Administration Error Survey. The research study involved 1205 nurses working in hospitals in the Czech Republic. Field surveys were carried out in September and October 2021. Descriptive statistics, Pearson's and Chi-square automatic interaction detection were used to analyze the data. The STROBE guideline was used. RESULTS: Among the most frequent causes of medication administration errors belong name (4.1 ± 1.4) and packaging similarity between different drugs (3.7 ± 1.4), the substitution of brand drugs by cheaper generics (3.6 ± 1.5), frequent interruptions during the preparation and administration of drugs (3.6 ± 1.5) and illegible medical records (3.5 ± 1.5). Not all medication administration errors are reported by nurses. The reasons for non-reporting of such errors include fear of being blamed for a decline in patient health (3.5 ± 1.5), fear of negative feelings from patients or family towards the nurse or legal liability (3.5 ± 1.6) and repressive responses by hospital management (3.3 ± 1.5). Most nurses (two-thirds) stated that less than 20 % of medication administration errors were reported. Older nurses reported statistically significantly fewer medication administration errors concerning non-intravenous drugs than younger nurses (p < 0.001). At the same time, nurses with more clinical experience (≥ 21 years) give significantly lower estimates of medication administration errors than nurses with less clinical practice (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patient safety training should take place at all levels of nursing education. The standardized Medication Administration Error survey is useful for clinical practice managers. It allows for the identification of medication administration error causes and offers preventive and corrective measures that can be implemented. Measures to reduce medication administration errors include developing a non-punitive adverse event reporting system, introducing electronic prescriptions of medicines, involving clinical pharmacists in the pharmacotherapy process and providing nurses with regular comprehensive training.

The Need for Required Stock Epinephrine in All Schools: A Work Group Report of the AAAAI Adverse Reactions to Foods Committee.

Epinephrine is the first line of treatment for anaphylaxis that can occur outside a medical setting in community environments such as schools. Patients with diagnosed IgE-mediated food allergy at risk of anaphylaxis are prescribed self-injectable epinephrine and given an individualized anaphylaxis action plan. As students, such patients/families provide their school with completed medication forms, a copy of their anaphylaxis plan, and additional student-specific epinephrine. However, students approved to self-carry prescribed self-injectable epinephrine may forget to do so or have other reasons for lacking prescribed epinephrine such as familial inability to fill the prescription due to cost or other access barriers. Undiagnosed students lacking prescribed epinephrine may also experience anaphylaxis at school. The presence of non-student-specific school stock epinephrine allows school nurses and other staff the ability to treat anaphylaxis onsite while awaiting Emergency Medical Services. Notably, not all states legally mandate K-12 schools to stock epinephrine. In states with laws only voluntarily allowing schools to stock epinephrine, it provides the ability to opt-out. Herein, we present a comprehensive review of barriers to school stock epinephrine, related improvement strategies, and workgroup recommendations supporting the need for mandated stock epinephrine in all schools in every state. Proposed solutions include ensuring legal immunity from liability for prescribers; advocacy for legislation to stabilize cost of self-injectable epinephrine; educational initiatives to schools promoting merits and safety of epinephrine and related anaphylaxis training; and partnerships between patient advocacy groups, medical and nursing organizations, public health departments and other health professionals to promote laws and district policies addressing need for stock epinephrine and school nurses to train and supervise school staff.

Assessment of medication administration of nurses in medical cardiac wards and its relationship with some demographic characteristics: An observational study.

BACKGROUND: Unsafe medication administration and medication errors pose a threat to medication safety. Safe medication is one of the most important nursing practices that plays an important role in preventing medication errors. The aim of this study was to assess the medication administration of nurses in cardiac wards and its relationship with some demographic characteristics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present study was conducted as an observational study in 2021 with the 60 nurses who working in the medical cardiac wards of one selected hospital affiliated with the Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Data were collected using three-part tools (demographic information, medication checklist (55 items), and documentation checklist (8 items). The checklist was completed by the observer after observing the nurses' medication administration. Data analysis was conducted using descriptive and inferential statistics in the SPSS software (version 16, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). A P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The mean total score of the principles of injection and oral medication administration were 82.53 ± 10.75 and 75.76 ± 9.62, respectively. The mean score of the principles of injection and oral medication administration in the morning shift was significantly higher than the evening and night shifts (P < 0.001). The relationship between the mean score of the principles of injection medication (r = 0.234, P = 0.067), oral medication (r = 0.222, P = 0.083), and the nurses' work experience no significant. The rate of adherence to the principles of medication administration in the premedication administration stage was higher than during and after drug administration. CONCLUSION: Although the mean score of medication administration of nurses in the medical cardiac wards was at the desired level, it is necessary to monitor and plan by nursing managers to improve medication administration. Reducing the number of night shifts, adhering to accreditation programs in the hospital, continuous monitoring of nurses in terms of compliance with the principles of medication are among the proposed solutions to improve the safe medication in nurses.

Cost-effectiveness of central automated unit dose dispensing with barcode-assisted medication administration in a hospital setting.

BACKGROUND: Central automated unit dose dispensing (cADD) with barcode-assisted medication administration (BCMA) has been shown to reduce medication administration errors (MAEs). Little is known about the cost-effectiveness of this intervention. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost-effectiveness of cADD with BCMA compared to usual care. METHODS: An economic evaluation was conducted alongside a prospective before-and-after effectiveness study in a Dutch university hospital. The primary effect measure was the difference between the rate of MAEs before and after implementation of cADD with BCMA, obtained by disguised observation in six clinical wards and subsequent extrapolation to the entire hospital. The cost-analysis was conducted from a hospital perspective with a 12-month incremental costing approach. The total costs covered the pharmaceutical service, nurse medication handling, wastage, and materials related to cADD. The primary outcome was the cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as costs per avoided MAE, obtained by dividing the annual incremental costs by the number of avoided MAEs. The secondary outcome was the cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as costs per avoided potentially harmful MAE (i.e. MAEs with the potential to cause harm). RESULTS: The intervention was associated with an absolute MAE reduction of 4.5% and a reduction of 2.7% for potentially harmful MAEs. Based on 2,260,870 administered medications in the entire hospital annually, a total of 102,210 MAEs and 59,830 potentially harmful MAEs were estimated to be avoided. The intervention was associated with an increased incremental cost of €1,808,600 annually. The cost-effectiveness ratio was €17.69 per avoided MAE and €30.23 per avoided potentially harmful MAE. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of cADD with BCMA was associated with a reduced rate of medication errors, including harmful ones, at higher overall costs. The costs per avoided error are relatively low, and therefore, this intervention could be an important strategy to improve patient safety in hospitals.

[The Situation Concerning Medication Administration at Nursery Schools from the Mothers' Perspective Evaluated Using a Questionnaire].

Previous studies have reported the inappropriate administration of medication at nursery schools by the staff and a lack of drug-related information from caregivers at the time of request. However, the situation concerning medication administration at nursery schools from the mothers' perspective is unknown and it is not clear what information the mothers provided to nursery staff at the request. We conducted an online survey between April and May 2019 regarding the administration of medication at the nursery school with input from 600 mothers. Overall, 510 (85%) individuals replied that the requests to administer medication were acceptable for all or some of the medications. Application forms for medications were used by 91% of the 301 mothers who had previously made such requests. Although information including the child's name, medication times, illness of the child, parent's name, and dosage form was specified by over 70% of mothers, drug-related information such as effectiveness, side effects, and drug interactions was insufficient. In total, 41 instances of inappropriate medication administration by staff were reported by 35 mothers. It is suggested that the drug information sheets provided by community pharmacies should make up for inadequate drug-related information on application forms for medications to avoid the risk of adverse events and reduce staff burden. Toward this end, it is necessary to provide easily understandable information sheets for nursery staff, as the medication is usually administered by nursery staff, not a nurse. Community pharmacists should support these measures as pharmaceutical professionals.

Medication management in intellectual disability settings: A systematic review.

There is a high level of medication usage among people with intellectual disability due to the presence of significant morbidity and co-morbidities. This review sought to explore medication management and administration in intellectual disability settings, identifying frameworks for practice, analysing whether collaborative practice led to better outcomes, identifying key processes associated with practice, locating tools to support practice and describing metrics for outcome measurement. A systematic review was conducted with analysis of 64 sources which remained following screening and appraisal. Limited evidence was identified with some insight into the processes underpinning medication management and administration. No assessment tools were found, but two potential outcome measures, adherence and errors, were noted. The paucity of guidelines and frameworks is concerning as this is a complex area of practice. There is a need for further practice development and research to be undertaken that takes note of the unique issues that can present in intellectual disability settings.

Factors contributing to reported medication administration incidents in patients' homes - A text mining analysis.

AIMS: To describe the characteristics of medication administration (MA) incidents reported to have occurred in patients' own homes (reporters' profession, incident types, contributing factors, patient consequence, and most common medications involved) and to identify the connection terms related to the most common contributing factors based on free text descriptions. DESIGN: A retrospective study using descriptive statistical analysis and text mining. METHODS: Medication administration incidents (N = 19,725) reported to have occurred in patients' homes between 2013-2018 in one district in Finland were analysed, describing the data by the reporters' occupation, incident type, contributing factors, and patient consequence. SAS® Text Miner was used to analyse free text descriptions of the MA incidents to understand contributing factors, using concept linking. RESULTS: Most MA incidents were reported by practical (lower level) nurses (77.8%, N = 15,349). The most common category of harm was 'mild harm' (40.1%, N = 7,915) and the most common error type was omissions of drug doses (47.4%, N = 9,343). The medications most commonly described were Marevan [warfarin] (N = 2,668), insulin (N = 811), Furesis [furosemide] (N = 590), antibiotic (N = 446), and Panadol [paracetamol] (N = 416). The contributing factors most commonly reported were 'communication and flow of information' (25.5%, N = 5,038), 'patient and relatives' (22.6%, N = 4,451), 'practices' (9.9%, N = 1,959), 'education and training' (4.8%, N = 949), and 'work environment and resources' (3.0%, N = 598). CONCLUSION: There is need for effective communication and clear responsibilities between home care patients and their relatives and health providers, about MA and its challenges in home environments. Knowledge and skills relating to safe MA are also essential. IMPACT: These findings about MA incidents that have occurred in patients' homes and have been reported by home care professionals demonstrate the need for medication safety improvement in home care.

[Survey on the Attitudes and Concerns of Nursing Home Staff Regarding Assistance of Medication Administrations in Japan: A Questionnaire Survey].

Care workers at care facilities play an important role in providing medication-administration assistance, and in medication risk management. Nevertheless, research has not made clear the specific concerns that care workers have at work sites, as well as the extent of their burdens. Thus, we conducted a questionnaire survey from October 1 through October 31, 2014 for staff who provide medication-administration assistance at for-pay elderly person homes about the concrete concerns and burdens with regards to the assistance. A total of 1677 respondents were analyzed: 228 nurses and 1449 care workers. Results showed that the care workers had a variety of problems and issues. These included the fact that, since care workers are not medical profession, they were unable to answer questions that the facility residents asked about their medications; they had concerns regarding their own lack of awareness of the efficacies of medications, and as to whether certain drugs were inappropriate for certain patients with swallowing dysfunctions; they wondered whether drugs in tablet forms had to be crushed before administration. They also encountered pharmacological-related issues, including whether administration times and numbers failed to match the lifestyle patterns of facility residents, and so forth. It is presumed that, with active intervention of pharmacists within facilities, these issues could be resolved. Study results, thus, suggested the need for system creation whereby pharmacists can become deeply involved in medication-administration assistance along with the care workers within facilities.

The Contribution of Staffing to Medication Administration Errors: A Text Mining Analysis of Incident Report Data.

PURPOSE: (a) To describe trigger terms that can be used to identify reports of inadequate staffing contributing to medication administration errors, (b) to identify such reports, (c) to compare the degree of harm within incidents with and without those triggers, and (d) to examine the association between the most commonly reported inadequate staffing trigger terms and the incidence of omission errors and "no harm" terms. DESIGN AND SETTING: This was a retrospective study using descriptive statistical analysis, text mining, and manual analysis of free text descriptions of medication administration-related incident reports (N = 72,390) reported to the National Reporting and Learning System for England and Wales in 2016. METHODS: Analysis included identifying terms indicating inadequate staffing (manual analysis), followed by text parsing, filtering, and concept linking (SAS Text Miner tool). IBM SPSS was used to describe the data, compare degree of harm for incidents with and without triggers, and to compare incidence of "omission errors" and "no harm" among the inadequate staffing trigger terms. FINDINGS: The most effective trigger terms for identifying inadequate staffing were "short staffing" (n = 81), "workload" (n = 80), and "extremely busy" (n = 51). There was significant variation in omission errors across inadequate staffing trigger terms (Fisher's exact test = 44.11, p < .001), with those related to "workload" most likely to accompany a report of an omission, followed by terms that mention "staffing" and being "busy." Prevalence of "no harm" did not vary statistically between the trigger terms (Fisher's exact test = 11.45, p = 0.49), but the triggers "workload," "staffing level," "busy night," and "busy unit" identified incidents with lower levels of "no harm" than for incidents overall. CONCLUSIONS: Inadequate staffing levels, workload, and working in haste may increase the risk for omissions and other types of error, as well as for patient harm. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This work lays the groundwork for creating automated text-analytical systems that could analyze incident reports in real time and flag or monitor staffing levels and related medication administration errors.

Identifying risks areas related to medication administrations - text mining analysis using free-text descriptions of incident reports.

BACKGROUND: Some medications carry increased risk of patient harm when they are given in error. In incident reports, names of the medications that are involved in errors could be found written both in a specific medication field and/or within the free text description of the incident. Analysing only the names of the medications implicated in a specific unstructured medication field does not give information of the associated factors and risk areas, but when analysing unstructured free text descriptions, the information about the medication involved and associated risk factors may be buried within other non-relevant text. Thus, the aim of this study was to extract medication names most commonly used in free text descriptions of medication administration incident reports to identify terms most frequently associated with risk for each of these medications using text mining. METHOD: Free text descriptions of medication administration incidents (n = 72,390) reported in 2016 to the National Reporting and Learning System for England and Wales were analysed using SAS® Text miner. Analysis included text parsing and filtering free text to identify most commonly mentioned medications, followed by concept linking, and clustering to identify terms associated with commonly mentioned medications and the associated risk areas. RESULTS: The following risk areas related to medications were identified: 1. Allergic reactions to antibacterial drugs, 2. Intravenous administration of antibacterial drugs, 3. Fentanyl patches, 4. Checking and documenting of analgesic doses, 5. Checking doses of anticoagulants, 6. Insulin doses and blood glucose, 7. Administration of intravenous infusions. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to increase medication administration safety should focus on checking patient allergies and medication doses, especially for intravenous and transdermal medications. High-risk medications include insulin, analgesics, antibacterial drugs, anticoagulants, and potassium chloride. Text mining may be useful for analysing large free text datasets and should be developed further.

Protocol for a non-randomised pilot and feasibility study evaluating a multicomponent intervention to simplify medication regimens for people receiving community-based home care services.

INTRODUCTION: Managing medication regimens is one of the most complex and burdensome tasks performed by older people, and can be prone to errors. People living with dementia may require medication administration assistance from formal and informal caregivers. Simplified medication regimens maintain the same therapeutic intent, but have less complex instructions and administration schedules. This protocol paper outlines a study to determine the feasibility of a multicomponent intervention to simplify medication regimens for people receiving community-based home care services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a non-randomised pilot and feasibility study. Research nurses will recruit 50 people receiving community-based home care services. All participants will receive the intervention from a clinical pharmacist, who will undertake medication reconciliation, assess each participant's capacity to self-manage their medication regimen and apply a structured tool to identify opportunities for medication simplification. The pharmacist will communicate recommendations regarding medication simplification to registered nurses at the community-based home care provider organisation. The primary outcome will be a description of study feasibility (recruitment and retention rates, protocol adherence and stakeholder acceptability). Secondary outcomes include the change in number of medication administration times per day, medication adherence, quality of life, participant satisfaction, medication incidents, falls and healthcare utilisation at 4 months. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee and the community-based home care provider organisation's ethical review panel. Research findings will be disseminated to consumers and caregivers, health professionals, researchers and healthcare providers through the National Health and Medical Research Council Cognitive Decline Partnership Centre and through conference presentations, lay summaries and peer-reviewed publications. This study will enable an improved understanding of medication management and administration among people receiving community-based home care services. This study will inform the decision to proceed with a randomised controlled trial to assess the effect of this intervention. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12618001130257; Pre-results.

SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER): study protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Complex medication regimens are highly prevalent in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Strategies to reduce unnecessary complexity may be valuable because complex medication regimens can be burdensome for residents and are costly in terms of nursing time. The aim of this study is to investigate application of a structured process to simplify medication administration in RACFs. METHODS: SImplification of Medications Prescribed to Long-tErm care Residents (SIMPLER) is a non-blinded, matched-pair, cluster randomised controlled trial of a single multidisciplinary intervention to simplify medication regimens. Trained study nurses will recruit English-speaking, permanent residents from eight South Australian RACFs. Medications taken by residents in the intervention arm will be assessed once using a structured tool (the Medication Regimen Simplification Guide for Residential Aged CarE) to identify opportunities to reduce medication regimen complexity (e.g. by administering medications at the same time, or through the use of longer-acting or combination formulations). Residents in the comparison group will receive routine care. Participants will be followed for up to 36 months after study entry. The primary outcome measure will be the total number of charted medication administration times at 4 months after study entry. Secondary outcome measures will include time spent administering medications, medication incidents, resident satisfaction, quality of life, falls, hospitalisation and mortality. Individual-level analyses that account for clustering will be undertaken to determine the impact of the intervention on the study outcomes. DISCUSSION: Ethical approval has been obtained from the Monash University Human Research Ethics Committee and the aged care provider organisation. Research findings will be disseminated through conference presentations and peer-reviewed publications. SIMPLER will enable an improved understanding of the burden of medication use in RACFs and quantify the impact of regimen simplification on a range of outcomes important to residents and care providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12617001060336 . Retrospectively registered on 20 July 2017.

Wrong-patient incidents during medication administrations.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To describe the factors pertaining to medication being administered to the wrong patient and to describe how patient identification is mentioned in wrong-patient incident reports. BACKGROUND: Although patient identification has been given high priority to improve patient safety, patient misidentifications occur, and wrong-patient incidents are common. DESIGN: A descriptive content analysis. METHODS: Incident reports related to medication administration (n = 1,012) were collected from two hospitals in Finland between 1 January 2013-31 December 2014. Of those, only incidents involving wrong-patient medication administration (n = 103) were included in this study. RESULTS: Wrong-patient incidents occurred due for many reasons, including nurse-related factors (such as tiredness, a lack of skills or negligence) but also system-related factors (such as rushing or heavy workloads). In 77% (n = 79) of wrong-patient incident reports, the process of identifying of the patient was not described at all. CONCLUSIONS: There is need to pay more attention to and increase training in correct identification processes to prevent wrong-patient incidents, and it is important to adjust system factors to support nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Active patient identification procedures, double-checking and verification at each stage of the medication process should be implemented. More attention should also be paid to organisational factors, such as division of work, rushing and workload, as well as to correct communication. The active participation of nurses in handling incidents could increase risk awareness and facilitate useful protection actions.

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.

Comparison of nurses and general caregivers' knowledge, attitude, and practice on medication administration process and their distress level in long-term care facilities across Penang, Kuala Lumpur, and Selangor of Malaysia.

AIM: Comparing nurses and general caregivers' knowledge, attitude, and practices (KAP) on medication administration process in long-term care (LTC) setting and an assessment of their stress, anxiety, and depression (SAD) level. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted among nurses and general caregivers working in LTC using a validated questionnaire. Consisting of demographic characteristics (Section 1); 40 questions on KAP (Section 2); and assessment of Depression, Anxiety, and Stress Scale (DASS-21) (Section 3). RESULTS: 155 formally paid staffs in 26 LTC facilities were recruited. Nurses scored significantly higher in the knowledge section compared to caregivers (12.4 ± 1.7 vs. 4.5 ± 3.8; P < 0.001); better attitude (41.5 ± 4.8 vs. 30.8 ± 7.3; P < 0.001); and better practice (65.2 ± 8.5 vs. 40.3 ± 10.9; P < 0.001), respectively. SAD scores reveal that caregivers had significantly higher level of stress, anxiety, and depression compared to the nurses. DISCUSSION: General caregivers exhibit poorer knowledge on aspects pertaining to posology, appropriate methods of drug administration, and side effects of common drugs used by the elderly. Compared to nurses, the general caregivers also reported poorer medication administration practices; including not checking labels and expiry dates prior to administration, and not providing basic information about medication therapy to the residents. However, both nurses and general caregivers reported positive attitudes in their role as caregivers. They take pride and satisfaction in their occupation providing support to the elderly. CONCLUSION: General caregivers demonstrated lesser knowledge, poorer attitude, and practices towards medication administration processes, in addition to higher SAD score in LTC facilities.

Safe medication management in specialized home healthcare - an observational study.

BACKGROUND: Medication management is a complex, error-prone process. The aim of this study was to explore what constitutes the complexity of the medication management process (MMP) in specialized home healthcare and how healthcare professionals handle this complexity. The study is theoretically based in resilience engineering. METHOD: Data were collected during the MMP at three specialized home healthcare units in Sweden using two strategies: observation of workplaces and shadowing RNs in everyday work, including interviews. Transcribed material was analysed using grounded theory. RESULTS: The MMP in home healthcare was dynamic and complex with unclear boundaries of responsibilities, inadequate information systems and fluctuating work conditions. Healthcare professionals adapted their everyday clinical work by sharing responsibility and simultaneously being authoritative and preserving patients' active participation, autonomy and integrity. To promote a safe MMP, healthcare professionals constantly re-prioritized goals, handled gaps in communication and information transmission at a distance by creating new bridging solutions. Trade-offs and workarounds were necessary elements, but also posed a threat to patient safety, as these interim solutions were not systematically evaluated or devised learning strategies. CONCLUSIONS: To manage a safe medication process in home healthcare, healthcare professionals need to adapt to fluctuating conditions and create bridging strategies through multiple parallel activities distributed over time, space and actors. The healthcare professionals' strategies could be integrated in continuous learning, while preserving boundaries of safety, instead of being more or less interim solutions. Patients' and family caregivers' as active partners in the MMP may be an underestimated resource for a resilient home healthcare.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of an Automated Medication System Implemented in a Danish Hospital Setting.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of an automated medication system (AMS) implemented in a Danish hospital setting. METHODS: An economic evaluation was performed alongside a controlled before-and-after effectiveness study with one control ward and one intervention ward. The primary outcome measure was the number of errors in the medication administration process observed prospectively before and after implementation. To determine the difference in proportion of errors after implementation of the AMS, logistic regression was applied with the presence of error(s) as the dependent variable. Time, group, and interaction between time and group were the independent variables. The cost analysis used the hospital perspective with a short-term incremental costing approach. The total 6-month costs with and without the AMS were calculated as well as the incremental costs. The number of avoided administration errors was related to the incremental costs to obtain the cost-effectiveness ratio expressed as the cost per avoided administration error. RESULTS: The AMS resulted in a statistically significant reduction in the proportion of errors in the intervention ward compared with the control ward. The cost analysis showed that the AMS increased the ward's 6-month cost by €16,843. The cost-effectiveness ratio was estimated at €2.01 per avoided administration error, €2.91 per avoided procedural error, and €19.38 per avoided clinical error. CONCLUSIONS: The AMS was effective in reducing errors in the medication administration process at a higher overall cost. The cost-effectiveness analysis showed that the AMS was associated with affordable cost-effectiveness rates.