Human-simulation-based learning to prevent medication error: A systematic review.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: In the past 2 decades, there has been an increasing interest in simulation-based learning programs to prevent medication error (ME). To improve knowledge, skills, and attitudes in prescribers, nurses, and pharmaceutical staff, these methods enable training without directly involving patients. However, best practices for simulation for healthcare providers are as yet undefined. By analysing the current state of experience in the field, the present review aims to assess whether human simulation in healthcare helps to reduce ME. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted on Medline from 2000 to June 2015, associating the terms "Patient Simulation," "Medication Errors," and "Simulation Healthcare." Reports of technology-based simulation were excluded, to focus exclusively on human simulation in nontechnical skills learning. RESULTS: Twenty-one studies assessing simulation-based learning programs were selected, focusing on pharmacy, medicine or nursing students, or concerning programs aimed at reducing administration or preparation errors, managing crises, or learning communication skills for healthcare professionals. The studies varied in design, methodology, and assessment criteria. Few demonstrated that simulation was more effective than didactic learning in reducing ME. This review highlights a lack of long-term assessment and real-life extrapolation, with limited scenarios and participant samples. These various experiences, however, help in identifying the key elements required for an effective human simulation-based learning program for ME prevention: ie, scenario design, debriefing, and perception assessment. The performance of these programs depends on their ability to reflect reality and on professional guidance. CONCLUSION: Properly regulated simulation is a good way to train staff in events that happen only exceptionally, as well as in standard daily activities. By integrating human factors, simulation seems to be effective in preventing iatrogenic risk related to ME, if the program is well designed.

Time in Therapeutic Range of Oral Vitamin K Antagonists in Hospitalized Elderly Patients.

BACKGROUND: Oral vitamin K antagonists (VKAs) are commonly used in older adults. To ensure the efficiency and safety of these drugs, the international normalized ratio (INR) must be monitored. The time in therapeutic range (TTR) is an internationally recommended assessment of the anticoagulation quality. OBJECTIVE: Our study aimed to assess the TTR of VKAs in a hospitalized geriatric population and identify factors associated with low TTR. METHODS: This was a multicenter retrospective study of data from 1899 patients with a mean age of 87 years between 2013 and 2015 in the geriatric units of four French hospitals. The data collection consisted of 2450 VKA prescriptions. We excluded prescriptions with a duration of < 7 days, monitoring with fewer than two INR values and patients with prosthetic heart valves. TTR was assessed using the Rosendaal method. Factors associated with a low TTR (< 50%) were assessed using a non-parametric method. RESULTS: The mean TTR observed in this population was 42.6%. The TTR was < 50% for 62.5% of the patients included in this study. Significant associations were found between TTR < 50% and aspartate transaminase (AST), alkaline phosphatase (ALT), thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), prescription duration, fluconazole instauration, hemoglobin, and C-reactive protein (CRP). CONCLUSIONS: Both our results and those in the literature indicate that TTR in geriatric populations is lower than that in the general population. Most patients had an insufficient TTR, exposing them to an increased risk of thromboembolic and hemorrhagic events. These data provide a perspective on poor-quality anticoagulation and illustrates the difficulty of using VKAs in geriatric patients.

SIMulation of Medication Error induced by Clinical Trial drug labeling: the SIMME-CT study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of investigational drug labels on the risk of medication error in drug dispensing. DESIGN: A simulation-based learning program focusing on investigational drug dispensing was conducted. SETTING: The study was undertaken in an Investigational Drugs Dispensing Unit of a University Hospital of Lyon, France. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty-three pharmacy workers (pharmacists, residents, technicians or students) were enrolled. INTERVENTION: Ten risk factors were selected concerning label information or the risk of confusion with another clinical trial. Each risk factor was scored independently out of 5: the higher the score, the greater the risk of error. From 400 labels analyzed, two groups were selected for the dispensing simulation: 27 labels with high risk (score ≥3) and 27 with low risk (score ≤2). Each question in the learning program was displayed as a simulated clinical trial prescription. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Medication error was defined as at least one erroneous answer (i.e. error in drug dispensing). For each question, response times were collected. RESULTS: High-risk investigational drug labels correlated with medication error and slower response time. Error rates were significantly 5.5-fold higher for high-risk series. Error frequency was not significantly affected by occupational category or experience in clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: SIMME-CT is the first simulation-based learning tool to focus on investigational drug labels as a risk factor for medication error. SIMME-CT was also used as a training tool for staff involved in clinical research, to develop medication error risk awareness and to validate competence in continuing medical education.