Errors and discrepancies in the administration of intravenous infusions: a mixed methods multihospital observational study.

INTRODUCTION: Intravenous medication administration has traditionally been regarded as error prone, with high potential for harm. A recent US multisite study revealed few potentially harmful errors despite a high overall error rate. However, there is limited evidence about infusion practices in England and how they relate to prevalence and types of error. OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence, types and severity of errors and discrepancies in infusion administration in English hospitals, and to explore sources of variation, including the contribution of smart pumps. METHODS: We conducted an observational point prevalence study of intravenous infusions in 16 National Health Service hospital trusts. Observers compared each infusion against the medication order and local policy. Deviations were classified as errors or discrepancies based on their potential for patient harm. Contextual issues and reasons for deviations were explored qualitatively during observer debriefs. RESULTS: Data were collected from 1326 patients and 2008 infusions. Errors were observed in 231 infusions (11.5%, 95% CI 10.2% to 13.0%). Discrepancies were observed in 1065 infusions (53.0%, 95% CI 50.8% to 55.2%). Twenty-three errors (1.1% of all infusions) were considered potentially harmful; none were judged likely to prolong hospital stay or result in long-term harm. Types and prevalence of errors and discrepancies varied widely among trusts, as did local policies. Deviations from medication orders and local policies were sometimes made for efficiency or patient need. Smart pumps, as currently implemented, had little effect, with similar error rates observed in infusions delivered with and without a smart pump (10.3% vs 10.8%, p=0.8). CONCLUSION: Errors and discrepancies are relatively common in everyday infusion administrations but most have low potential for patient harm. Better understanding of performance variability to strategically manage risk may be a more helpful tactic than striving to eliminate all deviations.

Procedural and documentation variations in intravenous infusion administration: a mixed methods study of policy and practice across 16 hospital trusts in England.

BACKGROUND: Procedural and documentation deviations relating to intravenous (IV) infusion administration can have important safety consequences. However, research on such deviations is limited. To address this we investigated the prevalence of procedural and documentation deviations in IV infusion administration and explored variability in policy and practice across different hospital trusts. METHODS: We conducted a mixed methods study. This involved observations of deviations from local policy including quantitative and qualitative data, and focus groups with clinical staff to explore the causes and contexts of deviations. The observations were conducted across five clinical areas (general medicine, general surgery, critical care, paediatrics and oncology day care) in 16 National Health Service (NHS) trusts in England. All infusions being administered at the time of data collection were included. Deviation rates for procedural and documentation requirements were compared between trusts. Local data collectors and other relevant stakeholders attended focus groups at each trust. Policy details and reasons for deviations were discussed. RESULTS: At least one procedural or documentation deviation was observed in 961 of 2008 IV infusions (deviation rate 47.9%; 95% confidence interval 45.5-49.8%). Deviation rates at individual trusts ranged from 9.9 to 100% of infusions, with considerable variation in the prevalence of different types of deviation. Focus groups revealed lack of policy awareness, ambiguous policies, safety and practicality concerns, different organisational priorities, and wide variation in policies and practice relating to prescribing and administration of IV flushes and double-checking. CONCLUSIONS: Deviation rates and procedural and documentation requirements varied considerably between hospital trusts. Our findings reveal areas where local policy and practice do not align. Some policies may be impractical and lack utility. We suggest clearer evidence-based standardisation and local procedures that are contextually practical to address these issues.

Understanding Care Navigation by Older Adults With Multimorbidity: Mixed-Methods Study Using Social Network and Framework Analyses.

BACKGROUND: Health and social care systems were designed to be used primarily by people with single and acute diseases. However, a growing number of older adults are diagnosed with multiple long-term conditions (LTCs). The process of navigating the intricacies of health and social care systems to receive appropriate care presents significant challenges for older people living with multiple LTCs, which in turn can negatively influence their well-being and quality of life. OBJECTIVE: The long-term goal of this work is to design technology to assist people with LTCs in navigating health and social care systems. To do so, we must first understand how older people living with LTCs currently engage with and navigate their care networks. No published research describes and analyses the structure of formal and informal care networks of older adults with multiple LTCs, the frequency of interactions with each type of care service, and the problems that typically arise in these interactions. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods study and recruited 62 participants aged ≥55 years who were living in England, had ≥2 LTCs, and had completed a social network analysis questionnaire. Semistructured interviews were conducted with roughly a 10% subsample of the questionnaire sample: 4 women and 3 men. On average, interviewees aged 70 years and had 4 LTCs. RESULTS: Personal care networks were complex and adapted to each individual. The task of building and subsequently navigating one's personal care network rested mainly on patients' shoulders. It was frequently the patients' task to bridge and connect the different parts of the system. The major factor leading to a satisfying navigation experience was found to be patients' assertive, determined, and proactive approaches. Furthermore, smooth communication and interaction between different parts of the care system led to more satisfying navigation experiences. CONCLUSIONS: Technology to support care navigation for older adults with multiple LTCs needs to support patients in managing complex health and social care systems by effectively integrating the management of multiple conditions and facilitating communication among multiple stakeholders, while also offering flexibility to adapt to individual situations. Quality of care seems to be dependent on the determination and ability of patients. Those with less determination and fewer organization skills experience worse care. Thus, technology must aim to fulfill these coordination functions to ensure care is equitable across those who need it.

Perceptions on use of home telemonitoring in patients with long term conditions - concordance with the Health Information Technology Acceptance Model: a qualitative collective case study.

BACKGROUND: Health information technology (HIT) may be used to improve care for increasing numbers of older people with long term conditions (LTCs) who make high demands on health and social care services. Despite its potential benefits for reducing disease exacerbations and hospitalisations, HIT home monitoring is not always accepted by patients. Using the Health Information Technology Acceptance Model (HITAM) this qualitative study examined the usefulness of the model for understanding acceptance of HIT in older people (≥60 years) participating in a RCT for older people with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) and associated heart diseases (CHROMED). METHODS: An instrumental, collective case study design was used with qualitative interviews of patients in the intervention arm of CHROMED. These were conducted at two time points, one shortly after installation of equipment and again at the end of (or withdrawal from) the study. We used Framework Analysis to examine how well the HITAM accounted for the data. RESULTS: Participants included 21 patients aged between 60-99 years and their partners or relatives where applicable. Additional concepts for the HITAM for older people included: concerns regarding health professional access and attachment; heightened illness anxiety and desire to avoid continuation of the 'sick-role'. In the technology zone, HIT self-efficacy was associated with good organisational processes and informal support; while ease of use was connected to equipment design being suitable for older people. HIT perceived usefulness was related to establishing trends in health status, detecting early signs of infection and potential to self-manage. Due to limited feedback to users opportunities to self-manage were reduced. CONCLUSIONS: HITAM helped understand the likelihood that older people with LTCs would use HIT, but did not explain how this might result in improved self-management. In order to increase HIT acceptance among older people, equipment design and organisational factors need to be considered. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01960907 October 9 2013 (retrospectively registered) Clinical tRials fOr elderly patients with MultiplE Disease (CHROMED). Start date October 2012, end date March 2016. Date of enrolment of the first participant was February 2013.

Having cancer in a foreign country.

OBJECTIVES: Although immigration and cancer care are two frequently discussed topics in healthcare, the combination of both has seldom been done. Little is known about how immigrant patients experience having cancer in a foreign country. The aim of the study is to gain deeper insight into the meaning of having cancer, in a foreign country and to identify the expectations and experiences of immigrant patients confronted with this disease. METHODS: Thirty adult non-western immigrant cancer patients were interviewed by means of an in-depth interview technique. The technique of constant comparison, derived from the constructivist grounded theory, was used to analyze the data from the interviews. RESULTS: Having cancer is a human experience, regardless of one's country of origin. Patients show universal reactions and reaction patterns when confronted with cancer and dealing with cancer treatment. Immigrant patients experience specific obstacles when dealing with cancer, of which the language barrier is the most important. A general lack of accurate basic knowledge about health and disease was found, making certain patients more vulnerable. CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: When dealing with cancer, immigrant patients are confronted with two major obstacles: a language barrier and a lack of knowledge about health and disease. The implications for a better practice occur on three levels: empowering patients, training healthcare professionals and adapting policy.

Collecting and registering sexual health information in the context of HIV risk in the electronic medical record of general practitioners: a qualitative exploration of the preference of general practitioners in urban communities in Flanders (Belgium).

UNLABELLED: Background and aim Current health-care delivery requires increasingly proactive and inter-professional work. Therefore, collecting patient information and knowledge management is of paramount importance. General practitioners (GPs) are well placed to lead these evolving models of care delivery. However, it is unclear how they are handling these changes. To gain an insight into this matter, the HIV epidemic was chosen as a test case. METHODS: Data were collected and analysed from 13 semi-structured interviews with GPs, working in urban communities in Flanders. Findings GPs use various types of patient information to estimate patients' risk of HIV. The way in which sexual health information is collected and registered, depends on the type of information under discussion. General patient information and medical history data are often automatically collected and registered. Proactively collecting sexual health information is uncommon. Moreover, the registration of the latter is not obvious, mostly owing to insufficient space in the electronic medical record (EMR). CONCLUSIONS: GPs seem willing to systematically collect and register sexual health information, in particular about HIV-risk factors. They expressed a need for guidance together with practical adjustments of the EMR to adequately capture and share this information.