Hospital-acquired acute hyponatremia and reports of pediatric deaths.

Information from four voluntary reports of hospital-acquired acute hyponatremia leading to the death of otherwise healthy children is highlighted. In this column, we present two cases and information from a recent ISMP Canada Safety Bulletin, as well as two cases reported to ISMP United States. Information is shared to enhance health care practitioners' awareness of the potential for acute hyponatremia and to provide an overview of some of the potential underlying factors.

Handoffs in care--can we make them safer?

In today's complex and rapidly changing health care environments, patient harm may result if important patient information is not communicated from one health care provider to another during handoffs in care. Issues involving communication, continuity of care, and care planning are cited as a root cause in more than 80% of reported sentinel events. In light of the inherent risks associated with handoffs in care, the use of strategies that reduce the impact of human factors on effective communication and standardize the communication process is essential to ensure appropriate communication patient information and that a plan of care is continued through the process.

Patient safety in a pediatric centre: partnering with families.

Patient Centred Care (PCC) is a recognized pillar of quality healthcare. According to the Institute of Medicine (Kohn et al. 2000), PCC respects and is responsive to individual patient preferences, needs and values, and ensures they guide all clinical decisions. In a pediatric setting, both the child and family's preferences and values are critical; as a result, the concept of PCC is broadened to include the entire family, and is termed Family Centred Care (FCC). True FCC requires transparent and ongoing collaboration between the child, family, and all members of the healthcare team. An institution's commitment to Family Centred Care must be explicit and permeate all aspects of healthcare provisions. At Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children (SickKids), the Families as Partners in Patient Safety Committee has proven to be a successful initiative based on Family Centred Care principles. This interdisciplinary committee includes healthcare providers, parents and representatives from our hospital's Children's Council. The mandate of the group is to: (1) identify patient safety (PS) issues, (2) make recommendations to improve PS and (3) increase awareness and promote the partnership between parents and staff in PS. Key initiatives to date include developing PS information for families, a combined hand hygiene campaign and a campaign to make the hospital 100% smoke-free. A task-oriented partnership between families and healthcare workers has proven to be a productive model for advancing pediatric patient safety.

Pictograms for Safer Medication Management by Health Care Workers.

BACKGROUND: Inherent risks are associated with the preparation and administration of medications. As such, a key aspect of medication safety is to ensure safe medication management practices. OBJECTIVE: To identify key medication safety issues and high-alert drug classes that might benefit from implementation of pictograms, for use by health care providers, to enhance medication administration safety. This study was the first step in the development of such pictograms. METHODS: Self-identified medication management experts participated in a modified Delphi process to achieve consensus on situations where safety pictograms are required for labelling to optimize safe medication management. The study was divided into 3 phases: issue generation, issue reduction, and issue selection. Issues achieving at least 80% consensus and deemed most essential were selected for future studies. Retained issues were subjected to semiotic analysis, and preliminary pictograms were developed. RESULTS: Of the 87 health care professionals (pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, nurses, and physicians) invited to participate in the Delphi process, 30 participated in all 3 phases. A total of 55 situations that could potentially benefit from safety pictograms were generated initially. Through the Delphi process, these were narrowed down to 10 situations where medication safety might be increased with the use of safety pictograms. For most of the retained issues, between 3 and 6 pictograms were designed, based on the results of the semiotic analysis. CONCLUSIONS: The pharmacists, pharmacy technicians, nurses, and physicians participating in this study reached consensus and identified 10 medication administration safety issues that might benefit from the development and implementation of safety pictograms. Pictograms were developed for a total of 9 issues. In follow-up studies, these pictograms will be validated for comprehension and evaluated for effectiveness.

CONTEXTE: Il y a des risques inhérents associés à la préparation et à l'administration de médicaments. Pour cette raison, l'un des principaux aspects de la sécurité des médicaments est d'assurer des pratiques de gestion des médicaments sécuritaires. OBJECTIF: Déterminer les principales questions de sécurité des médicaments et les classes de médicaments de niveau d'alerte élevé pour lesquelles l'ajout de pictogrammes, destinés aux fournisseurs de soins de santé, permettrait de rendre l'administration de médicaments plus sécuritaire. La présente étude représentait la première étape dans l'élaboration de ces pictogrammes. MÉTHODES: Des professionnels qui se définissaient comme experts en gestion de médicaments ont participé à un processus Delphi modifié dans le but d'arriver à un consensus à propos des situations où des pictogrammes de sécurité doivent être ajoutés à l'étiquette afin d'optimiser la gestion sécuritaire des médicaments. L'étude a été divisée en trois phases : génération de questions de sécurité, élimination de questions de sécurité et sélection de questions de sécurité. Les questions qui atteignaient un consensus d'au moins 80 % et qui étaient considérées comme les plus essentielles ont été retenues pour des études ultérieures. Les questions de sécurité retenues ont été soumises à une analyse sémiotique, puis des ébauches de pictogrammes ont été créées. RÉSULTATS: Parmi les 87 professionnels de la santé (notamment des pharmaciens, des techniciens en pharmacie, du personnel infirmier et des médecins) invités à participer au processus Delphi, 30 ont pris part aux trois étapes. Au total, 55 situations pour lesquelles il pourrait être avantageux d'utiliser des pictogrammes de sécurité ont été générées au départ. Grâce au processus Delphi, ce nombre a été réduit à 10 situations pour lesquelles la sécurité des médicaments pourrait être accrue à l'aide de pictogrammes de sécurité. Pour la plupart des questions retenues, entre trois et six pictogrammes ont été conçus à l'aide des résultats de l'analyse sémiotique. CONCLUSION: Les pharmaciens, les techniciens en pharmacie, le personnel infirmier et les médecins qui ont participé à l'étude ont atteint un consensus sur dix questions au sujet de l'administration sécuritaire des médicaments pour lesquelles l'élaboration et la mise en place de pictogrammes de sécurité pourraient être avantageuses. Ensuite, des pictogrammes ont été conçus pour neuf questions au total. Dans les études ultérieures, il faudra évaluer l'efficacité des pictogrammes et s'assurer qu'ils sont interprétés correctement.

Prevalence and clinical significance of medication discrepancies at pediatric hospital admission.

OBJECTIVE: To quantify admission medication discrepancies in a tertiary-care, general pediatric population, to describe their clinical importance and associated factors, and to assess a screening approach to pharmacist involvement. METHODS: A total of 272 patients were studied prospectively at hospital admission. The study pharmacist performed a medication history and compared it to physicians' admission medication orders. Discrepancies between the 2 were coded as intentional but undocumented or unintentional. Unintentional discrepancies were rated for potential to cause harm by 3 physicians. Additional data collected included patients' reason for admission and presence of chronic conditions, whether physicians used a medication reconciliation form, the characteristics of patients' home medication regimen, and the time required to perform a pharmacist history and reconciliation. Interrater reliability and associations between baseline characteristics and discrepancy rates were explored. RESULTS: Eighty patients (30%) had at least one undocumented intentional discrepancy (range, 0-7). At least one unintentional discrepancy (range, 0-9) was found in 59 patients (22%). Of the unintentional discrepancies, 23% had moderate and 6% had severe potential to cause discomfort or deterioration. Ratings were similar among the 3 physicians. Characteristics associated with higher risk of clinically important discrepancies were: use of the medication reconciliation form, > or =4 prescription medications, and antiepileptic drug use. Logistic regression revealed that only the variable > or =4 medications was independently associated with clinically important discrepancies. CONCLUSIONS: Admission medication errors are common in this tertiary-care, general pediatric population, and nearly a third represent potential adverse events. The use of a medication reconciliation form by physicians without pharmacist involvement does not appear to reduce errors. A cutoff of > or =4 prescription medications is highly sensitive for identifying patients at risk of clinically important discrepancies.