Evolution of Intravenous Medication Errors and Preventive Systemic Defenses in Hospital Settings-A Narrative Review of Recent Evidence.

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous drug administration has been associated with severe medication errors in hospitals. The present narrative review is based on a systematic literature search, and aimed to describe the recent evolution in research on systemic causes and defenses in intravenous medication errors in hospitals. METHODS: This narrative review was based on Reason's theory of systems-based risk management. A systematic literature search covering the period from June 2016 to October 2021 was conducted on Medline (Ovid). We used the search strategy and selection criteria developed for our previous systematic reviews. The included articles were analyzed and compared to our previous reviews. RESULTS: The updated search found 435 articles. Of the 63 included articles, 16 focused on systemic causes of intravenous medication errors, and 47 on systemic defenses. A high proportion (n = 24, 38%) of the studies were conducted in the United States or Canada. Most of the studies focused on drug administration (n = 21/63, 33%) and preparation (n = 19/63, 30%). Compared to our previous review of error causes, more studies (n = 5/16, 31%) utilized research designs with a prospective risk management approach. Within articles related to systemic defenses, smart infusion pumps remained most widely studied (n = 10/47, 21%), while those related to preparation technologies (n = 7/47, 15%) had increased. CONCLUSIONS: This narrative review demonstrates a growing interest in systems-based risk management for intravenous drug therapy and in introducing new technology, particularly smart infusion pumps and preparation systems, as systemic defenses. When introducing new technologies, prospective assessment and continuous monitoring of emerging safety risks should be conducted.

Use of Computerized Physician Order Entry with Clinical Decision Support to Prevent Dose Errors in Pediatric Medication Orders: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Prescribing is a high-risk task within the pediatric medication-use process and requires defenses to prevent errors. Such system-centric defenses include electronic health record systems with computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support (CDS) tools that assist safe prescribing. The objective of this study was to examine the effects of CPOE systems with CDS functions in preventing dose errors in pediatric medication orders. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 criteria and Synthesis Without Meta-Analysis (SWiM) items. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021277413). The final literature search on MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, Web of Science, and EMB Reviews was conducted on 10 September 2023. Only peer-reviewed studies considering both CPOE and CDS systems in pediatric inpatient or outpatient settings were included. Study selection, data extraction, and evidence quality assessment (JBI critical appraisal tool assessment and GRADE approach) were carried out by two individual reviewers. Vote counting method was used to evaluate the effects of CPOE-CDS systems on dose errors rates. RESULTS: A total of 17 studies published in 2007-2021 met the inclusion criteria. The most used CDS tools were dose range check (n = 14), dose calculator (n = 8), and dosing frequency check (n = 8). Alerts were recorded in 15 studies. A statistically significant reduction in dose errors was found in eight studies, whereas an increase of dose errors was not reported. CONCLUSIONS: The CPOE-CDS systems have the potential to reduce pediatric dose errors. Most beneficial interventions seem to be system customization, implementing CDS alerts, and the use of dose range check. While human factors are still present within the medication use process, further studies and development activities are needed to optimize the usability of CPOE-CDS systems.

Medication errors related to high-alert medications in a paediatric university hospital - a cross-sectional study analysing error reporting system data.

BACKGROUND: Paediatric patients are prone to medication errors, and only a few studies have explored errors in high-alert medications in children. The present study aimed to investigate the prevalence and nature of medication errors involving high-alert medications and whether high-alert medications are more likely associated with severe patient harm and higher error risk classification compared to other drugs. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional report of self-reported medication errors in a paediatric university hospital in 2018-2020. Medication error reports involving high-alert medications were investigated by descriptive quantitative analysis to identify the prevalence of different drugs, Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical groups, administration routes, and the most severe medication errors. Crosstabulation and Pearson Chi-Square (χ2) tests were used to compare the likelihood of more severe consequences to the patient and higher error risk classification between medication errors involving high-alert medications and other drugs. RESULTS: Among the reported errors (n = 2,132), approximately one-third (34.8%, n = 743) involved high-alert medications (n = 872). The most common Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical subgroups were blood substitutes and perfusion solutions (B05; n = 345/872, 40%), antineoplastic agents (L01; n = 139/872, 16%), and analgesics (N02; n = 98/872, 11%). The majority of high-alert medications were administered intravenously (n = 636/872, 73%). Moreover, IV preparations were administered via off-label routes (n = 52/872, 6%), such as oral, inhalation and intranasal routes. Any degree of harm (minor, moderate or severe) to the patient and the highest risk classifications (IV-V) were more likely to be associated with medication errors involving high-alert medications (n = 743) when compared to reports involving other drugs (n = 1,389). CONCLUSIONS: Preventive risk management should be targeted on high-alert medications in paediatric hospital settings. In these actions, the use of intravenous drugs, such as parenteral nutrition, concentrated electrolytes, analgesics and antineoplastic agents, and off-label use of medications should be prioritised. Further research on the root causes of medication errors involving high-alert medications and the effectiveness of safeguards is warranted.

Dose error reduction software in medication safety risk management - optimising the smart infusion pump dosing limits in neonatal intensive care unit prior to implementation.

BACKGROUND: Smart infusion pumps with dose error reduction software can be used to prevent harmful medication errors. The aim of this study was to develop a method for defining and assessing optimal dosing limits in a neonatal intensive care unit's smart infusion pump drug library by using simulation-type test cases developed based on medication error reports. METHODS: This mixed-methods study applied both qualitative and quantitative methods. First, wrong infusion rate-related medication errors reported in the neonatal intensive care unit during 2018-2019 were explored by quantitative descriptive analysis and qualitative content analysis to identify the error mechanisms. The researchers developed simulation-type test cases with potential errors, and a literature-based calculation formula was used to set upper soft limits to the drug library. The limits were evaluated by conducting programming of pumps without errors and with potential errors for two imaginary test patients (1 kg and 3.5 kg). RESULTS: Of all medication errors reported in the neonatal intensive care unit, 3.5% (n = 21/601) involved an error or near-miss related to wrong infusion rate. Based on the identified error mechanisms, 2-, 5-, and 10-fold infusion rates, as well as mix-ups between infusion rates of different drugs, were established as test cases. When conducting the pump programming for the test cases (n = 226), no alerts were triggered with infusion rates responding to the usual dosages (n = 32). 73% (n = 70/96) of the erroneous 2-, 5-, and 10-fold infusion rates caused an alert. Mix-ups between infusion rates triggered an alert only in 24% (n = 24/98) of the test cases. CONCLUSIONS: Simulation-type test cases can be applied to assess the appropriateness of dosing limits within the neonatal intensive care unit's drug library. In developing the test cases, combining hospital's medication error data to other prospective data collection methods is recommended to gain a comprehensive understanding on mechanisms of wrong infusion rate errors. After drug library implementation, the alert log data and drug library compliance should be studied to verify suitability of dosing limits.

Integrating medication risk management interventions into regular automated dose dispensing service of older home care clients - a systems approach.

BACKGROUND: Automated dose dispensing (ADD) services have been implemented in many health care systems internationally. However, the ADD service itself is a logistic process that requires integration with medication risk management interventions to ensure safe and appropriate medication use. National policies and regulations guiding ADD in Finland have recommended medication reconciliation, review, and follow-up for suitable risk management interventions. This implementation study aimed to develop a medication management process integrating these recommended risk management interventions into a regular ADD service for older home care clients. METHODS: This study applied an action research method and was carried out in a home care setting, part of primary care in the City of Lahti, Finland. The systems-approach to risk management was applied as a theoretical framework. RESULTS: The outcome of the systems-based development process was a comprehensive medication management procedure. The medication risk management interventions of medication reconciliation, review and follow-up were integrated into the medication management process while implementing the ADD service. The tasks and responsibilities of each health care professional involved in the care team became more explicitly defined, and available resources were utilized more effectively. In particular, the hospital pharmacists became members of the care team where collaboration between physicians, pharmacists, and nurses shifted from parallel working towards close collaboration. More efforts are needed to integrate community pharmacists into the care team. CONCLUSION: The transition to the ADD service allows implementation of the effective medication risk management interventions within regular home care practice. These systemic defenses should be considered when national ADD guidelines are implemented locally. The same applies to situations in which public home care organizations responsible for services e.g., municipalities, purchase ADD services from private service providers.

Identification and safe storage of look-alike, sound-alike medicines in automated dispensing cabinets.

OBJECTIVES: Automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) are used in hospitals to improve medication safety and decrease costs. However, ADCs do not completely eliminate the risk of mistakes between look-alike, sound-alike (LASA) medicines. The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics of LASA medicines and determine the factors related to their safe storage in ADCs. METHODS: The medication selection of one hospital pharmacy's ADC located in an intensive care unit was observed. The study consisted of five parts: a determination of criteria to identify LASA medications, an analysis of an ADCs' inventory reports, assessment of the storage of identified LASA medicines, a visual observation of the medicine packages stored in the same storage compartment and qualitative analysis of the medication-use process from prescribing a medicine to removing it from an ADC. RESULTS: Approximately 70% (n=355/488) of the ADCs selection had a LASA risk with at least one product. Moreover, 20% (n=84/355) of the LASA medicines identified were high-alert medications. Approximately 16% (n=58/355) of the identified LASA medicines were stored unsafely close to at least one other LASA medicine. Less than 4% (n=13/355) of the LASA medicines were unsafely stored high-alert medications. CONCLUSIONS: ADCs reduce the risks of LASA medication errors when used correctly, but automation can also increase them, for example, when placing multiple LASA medicines in the same storage compartment. Attention should be paid to the identification and safe storage of LASA medicines to promote safe use of ADCs in hospitals.

Systemic Causes of In-Hospital Intravenous Medication Errors: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Delivery of intravenous medications in hospitals is a complex process posing to systemic risks for errors. The aim of this study was to identify systemic causes of in-hospital intravenous medication errors. METHODS: A systematic review adhering to PRISMA guidelines was conducted. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL, and EMB reviews for articles published between January 2005 and June 2016. Peer-reviewed journal articles published in English were included. Two reviewers independently selected articles according to a predetermined PICO tool. The quality of studies was assessed using the GRADE system and the evidence analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Eleven studies from six countries were included in the analysis. We identified systemic causes related to prescribing (n = 6 studies), preparation (n = 6), administration (n = 6), dispensing and storage (n = 5), and treatment monitoring (n = 2). Administration, prescribing, and preparation were the process phases most prone to systemic errors. Insufficient actions to secure safe use of high-alert medications, lack of knowledge of the drug, calculation tasks, failure in double-checking procedures, and confusion between look-alike, sound-alike medications were the leading causes of intravenous medication errors. The number of the included studies was limited, all of them being observational studies and graded as low quality. CONCLUSIONS: Current intravenous medication systems remain vulnerable, which can result in patient harm. Our findings suggest further focus on medication safety activities related to administration, prescribing, and preparation of intravenous medications. This study provides healthcare organizations with preliminary knowledge about systemic causes of intravenous medication errors, but more rigorous evidence is needed.

Systemic Defenses to Prevent Intravenous Medication Errors in Hospitals: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous medication delivery is a complex process that poses systemic risks of errors. The objective of our study was to identify systemic defenses that can prevent in-hospital intravenous (IV) medication errors. METHODS: A systematic review adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was conducted. We searched MEDLINE (Ovid), Scopus, CINAHL, and EMB reviews for articles published between January 2005 and June 2016. Peer-reviewed journal articles published in English were included. Two reviewers independently selected articles according to a predetermined PICO tool. The quality of studies was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, and the evidence was analyzed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Forty-six studies from 11 countries were included in the analysis. We identified systemic defenses related to administration (n = 24 studies), prescribing (n = 8), preparation (n = 6), treatment monitoring (n = 2), and dispensing (n = 1). In addition, 5 studies explored defenses related to multiple stages of the drug delivery process. Systemic defenses including features of closed-loop medication management systems appeared in 61% of the studies, with smart pumps being the defense most widely studied (24%). The evidence quality of the included articles was limited, as 83% were graded as low quality, 13% were of moderate quality, and only 4% were of high quality. CONCLUSIONS: In-hospital IV medication processes are developing toward closed-loop medication management systems. Our study provides health care organizations with preliminary knowledge about systemic defenses that can prevent IV medication errors, but more rigorous evidence is needed. There is a need for further studies to explore combinations of different systemic defenses and their effectiveness in error prevention throughout the drug delivery process.