Paediatric medication incident reporting: a multicentre comparison study of medication errors identified at audit, detected by staff and reported to an incident system.

OBJECTIVES: To compare medication errors identified at audit and via direct observation with medication errors reported to an incident reporting system at paediatric hospitals and to investigate differences in types and severity of errors detected and reported by staff. METHODS: This is a comparison study at two tertiary referral paediatric hospitals between 2016 and 2020 in Australia. Prescribing errors were identified from a medication chart audit of 7785 patient records. Medication administration errors were identified from a prospective direct observational study of 5137 medication administration doses to 1530 patients. Medication errors reported to the hospitals' incident reporting system were identified and matched with errors identified at audit and observation. RESULTS: Of 11 302 clinical prescribing errors identified at audit, 3.2 per 1000 errors (95% CI 2.3 to 4.4, n=36) had an incident report. Of 2224 potentially serious prescribing errors from audit, 26.1% (95% CI 24.3 to 27.9, n=580) were detected by staff and 11.2 per 1000 errors (95% CI 7.6 to 16.5, n=25) were reported to the incident system. Although the prescribing error detection rates varied between the two hospitals, there was no difference in incident reporting rates regardless of error severity. Of 40 errors associated with actual patient harm, only 7 (17.5%; 95% CI 8.7% to 31.9%) were detected by staff and 4 (10.0%; 95% CI 4.0% to 23.1%) had an incident report. None of the 2883 clinical medication administration errors observed, including 903 potentially serious errors and 144 errors associated with actual patient harm, had incident reports. CONCLUSION: Incident reporting data do not provide an accurate reflection of medication errors and related harm to children in hospitals. Failure to detect medication errors is likely to be a significant contributor to low error reporting rates. In an era of electronic health records, new automated approaches to monitor medication safety should be pursued to provide real-time monitoring.

Quality of care for acute abdominal pain in children.

OBJECTIVE: To assess quality of care for children presenting with acute abdominal pain using validated indicators. DESIGN: Audit of care quality for acute abdominal pain according to 21 care quality indicators developed and validated in four stages. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Medical records of children aged 1-15 years receiving care in 2012-2013 were sampled from 57 general practitioners, 34 emergency departments (ED) and 28 hospitals across three Australian states; 6689 medical records were screened for visits for acute abdominal pain and audited by trained paediatric nurses. OUTCOME MEASURES: Adherence to 21 care quality indicators and three bundles of indicators: bundle A-History; bundle B-Examination; bundle C-Imaging. RESULTS: Five hundred and fourteen children had 696 visits for acute abdominal pain and adherence was assessed for 9785 individual indicators. The overall adherence was 69.9% (95% CI 64.8% to 74.6%). Adherence to individual indicators ranged from 21.6% for assessment of dehydration to 91.4% for appropriate ordering of imaging. Adherence was low for bundle A-History (29.4%) and bundle B-Examination (10.2%), and high for bundle C-Imaging (91.4%). Adherence to the 21 indicators overall was significantly lower in general practice (62.7%, 95% CI 57.0% to 68.1%) compared with ED (86.0%, 95% CI 83.4% to 88.4%; p<0.0001) and hospital inpatient settings (87.9%, 95% CI 83.1% to 91.8%; p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: There was considerable variation in care quality for indicator bundles and care settings. Future work should explore how validated care quality indicator assessments can be embedded into clinical workflows to support continuous care quality improvement.

Assessing the quality of health care in the management of bronchiolitis in Australian children: a population-based sample survey.

BACKGROUND: Bronchiolitis is the most common cause of respiratory hospitalisation in children aged <2 years. Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) suggest only supportive management of bronchiolitis. However, the availability of CPGs do not guarantee that they are used appropriately and marked variation in the clinical management exists. We conducted an assessment of guideline adherence in the management of bronchiolitis in children at a subnationally representative level including inpatient and ambulatory services in Australia. METHODS: We searched for national and international CPGs relating to management of bronchiolitis in children and identified 16 recommendations which were formatted into 40 medical record audit indicator questions. A retrospective medical record review assessing compliance with the CPGs was conducted across three types of healthcare setting: hospital inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) presentations and general practice (GP) consultations in three Australian states for children aged <2 years receiving care in 2012 and 2013. RESULTS: Purpose-trained surveyors conducted 13 979 eligible indicator assessments across 796 visits for bronchiolitis at 119 sites. Guideline adherence for management of bronchiolitis was 77.3% (95% CI 72.6 to 81.5) for children attending EDs, 81.6% (95% CI 78.0 to 84.9) for inpatients and 52.3% (95% CI 44.8 to 59.7) for children attending GP consultations. While adherence to some individual indicators was high, overall adherence to documentation of 10 indicators relating to history taking and examination was poorest and estimated at 2.7% (95% CI 1.5 to 4.4). CONCLUSIONS: The study is the first to assess guideline-adherence in both hospital (ED and inpatient) and GP settings. Our study demonstrated that while the quality of care for bronchiolitis was generally adherent to CPG indicators, specific aspects of management were deficient, especially documentation of history taking.