Use of an audit with feedback implementation strategy to promote medication error reporting by nurses.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To outline the development and effect of an audit with feedback implementation strategy that intended to increase the rate of voluntary medication error reporting by nurses. BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a serious global health issue. Audit with feedback is a widely used implementation strategy that has potential to modify nurses' reporting behaviour and improve medication error reporting rates. DESIGN: Quasi-experimental implementation study (fulfilling the TIDieR checklist) with two pairs of matched wards at a private hospital in Australia was conducted from March 2015-September 2016. One ward from each pair was randomised to either the intervention or control group. METHOD: Nurses within intervention wards received audit with feedback on a quarterly basis over a 12-month implementation period. Control wards underwent quarterly audits only (without feedback). Feedback consisted of a one-page infographic poster, with content based on medication error data obtained from audits and the hospitals' risk management system (RiskMan). The primary outcome-rate of medication errors reported per month-was determined in both groups at pre-implementation, implementation and postimplementation phases. Differences between groups were compared using generalised linear mixed models with Poisson distribution and log link. RESULTS: A nonsignificant intervention effect was found for rate of medication errors reported per month. Interestingly, when combining data from both groups, a significant increasing time trend was observed for medication errors reported per month across pre-implementation and implementation phases (80% increase). CONCLUSIONS: The audit with feedback strategy developed in the present study did not effectively influence the voluntary reporting of medication errors by nurses. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Despite the lack of intervention effects, the use of a published checklist to optimise the reporting quality of this study will contribute to the field by furthering the understanding of how to enhance audit with feedback implementation strategies for nurses.

Substance use and its implications for the critical care nurses: a literature review.

BACKGROUND: Illicit drug use in Australia has been increasing and studies indicate that illicit drug users have a higher risk of accidents which may result in the user needing critical care. However, there is a significant gap in the literature specifically pertaining to the implications of drug use in critical care. AIMS: The primary objective was to examine the literature for the physiological effects of methylenedioxymethamphetamine (MDMA), cocaine and amphetamines in critically ill patients. METHODS: A comprehensive literature review was undertaken and a body systems framework was used to categorise the effects of these illicit drugs. RESULTS: The illicit substances addressed have potentially fatal and long-term side effects. For those users involved in accidents or trauma requiring intensive or critical care nursing, the mortality and co-morbidity risks are increased significantly. It is, therefore, important that nurses are able to recognise the specific physiological effects and possible complications that can occur with the use of each illicit drug. CONCLUSION: Both nursing and medical staff need to have a thorough understanding of how illicit substances work and how they can affect the critical care patient and the care they are given.

Implementation of an audit with feedback knowledge translation intervention to promote medication error reporting in health care: a protocol.

BACKGROUND: Health professionals strive to deliver high-quality care in an inherently complex and error-prone environment. Underreporting of medical errors challenges attempts to understand causative factors and impedes efforts to implement preventive strategies. Audit with feedback is a knowledge translation strategy that has potential to modify health professionals' medical error reporting behaviour. However, evidence regarding which aspects of this complex, multi-dimensional intervention work best is lacking. The aims of the Safe Medication Audit Reporting Translation (SMART) study are to: 1. Implement and refine a reporting mechanism to feed audit data on medication errors back to nurses 2. Test the feedback reporting mechanism to determine its utility and effect 3. Identify characteristics of organisational context associated with error reporting in response to feedback METHODS/DESIGN: A quasi-experimental design, incorporating two pairs of matched wards at an acute care hospital, is used. Randomisation occurs at the ward level; one ward from each pair is randomised to receive the intervention. A key stakeholder reference group informs the design and delivery of the feedback intervention. Nurses on the intervention wards receive the feedback intervention (feedback of analysed audit data) on a quarterly basis for 12 months. Data for the feedback intervention come from medication documentation point-prevalence audits and weekly reports on routinely collected medication error data. Weekly reports on these data are obtained for the control wards. A controlled interrupted time series analysis is used to evaluate the effect of the feedback intervention. Self-report data are also collected from nurses on all four wards at baseline and at completion of the intervention to elicit their perceptions of the work context. Additionally, following each feedback cycle, nurses on the intervention wards are invited to complete a survey to evaluate the feedback and to establish their intentions to change their reporting behaviour. To assess sustainability of the intervention, at 6 months following completion of the intervention a point-prevalence chart audit is undertaken and a report of routinely collected medication errors for the previous 6 months is obtained. This intervention will have wider application for delivery of feedback to promote behaviour change for other areas of preventable error and adverse events.