Self-reported violations during medication administration in two paediatric hospitals.

CONTENT: Violations of safety protocols are paths to adverse outcomes that have been poorly addressed by existing safety efforts. This study reports on nurses' self-reported violations in the medication administration process. OBJECTIVE: To assess the extent of violations in the medication administration process among nurses. DESIGN, SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Participants were 199 nurses from two US urban, academic, tertiary care, free-standing paediatric hospitals who worked in a paediatric intensive care unit (PICU), a haematology-oncology-transplant (HOT) unit or a medical-surgical (Med/Surg) unit. In a cross-sectional survey, nurses were asked about violations in routine or emergency situations in three steps of the medication administration process. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Self-reported violations of three medication administration protocols were made using a seven-point 0-6 scale from 'not at all' to 'a great deal'. RESULTS: Analysis of variance identified that violation reports were highest for emergency situations, rather than for routine operations, highest by HOT unit nurses, followed by PICU nurses and then Med/Surg unit nurses, and highest during patient identification checking, followed by matching a medication to a medication administration record, and then documenting an administration. There was also a significant three-way interaction among violation situation, step in the process, and unit. CONCLUSIONS: Protocol violations occur throughout the medication administration process and their prevalence varies as a function of hospital unit, step in the process, and violation situation. Further research is required to determine whether these violations improve or worsen safety, and for those that worsen safety, how to redesign the system of administration to reduce the need to violate protocol to accomplish job tasks.

That's nice, but what does IT do? Evaluating the impact of bar coded medication administration by measuring changes in the process of care.

Health information technology (IT) is widely endorsed as a way to improve key health care outcomes, particularly patient safety. Applying a human factors approach, this paper models more explicitly how health IT might improve or worsen outcomes. The human factors model specifies that health IT transforms the work system, which transforms the process of care, which in turn transforms the outcome of care. This study reports on transformations of the medication administration process that resulted from the implementation of one type of IT: bar coded medication administration (BCMA). Registered nurses at two large pediatric hospitals in the US participated in a survey administered before and after one of the hospitals implemented BCMA. Nurses' perceptions of the administration process changed at the hospital that implemented BCMA, whereas perceptions of nurses at the control hospital did not. BCMA appeared to improve the safety of the processes of matching medications to the medication administration record and checking patient identification. The accuracy, usefulness, and consistency of checking patient identification improved as well. In contrast, nurses' perceptions of the usefulness, time efficiency, and ease of the documentation process decreased post-BCMA. Discussion of survey findings is supplemented by observations and interviews at the hospital that implemented BCMA. By considering the way that IT transforms the work system and the work process a practitioner can better predict the kind of outcomes that the IT might produce. More importantly, the practitioner can achieve or prevent outcomes of interest by using design and redesign aimed at controlling work system and process transformations.

A human factors framework and study of the effect of nursing workload on patient safety and employee quality of working life.

BACKGROUND: Nursing workload is increasingly thought to contribute to both nurses' quality of working life and quality/safety of care. Prior studies lack a coherent model for conceptualising and measuring the effects of workload in healthcare. In contrast, we conceptualised a human factors model for workload specifying workload at three distinct levels of analysis and having multiple nurse and patient outcomes. METHODS: To test this model, we analysed results from a cross-sectional survey of a volunteer sample of nurses in six units of two academic tertiary care paediatric hospitals. RESULTS: Workload measures were generally correlated with outcomes of interest. A multivariate structural model revealed that: the unit-level measure of staffing adequacy was significantly related to job dissatisfaction (path loading=0.31) and burnout (path loading=0.45); the task-level measure of mental workload related to interruptions, divided attention, and being rushed was associated with burnout (path loading=0.25) and medication error likelihood (path loading=1.04). Job-level workload was not uniquely and significantly associated with any outcomes. DISCUSSION: The human factors engineering model of nursing workload was supported by data from two paediatric hospitals. The findings provided a novel insight into specific ways that different types of workload could affect nurse and patient outcomes. These findings suggest further research and yield a number of human factors design suggestions.

A systematic review of safety violations in industry.

It is widely known that intentional non-malevolent violations of safety procedures and norms occur and evidence shows that safety violations can increase the risk of accidents. However, little research about the causes of these violations in work settings exists. To help shed light on the causes, this paper systematically reviews the empirical causes of safety violations in industry. Electronic database literature searches were performed to identify relevant articles published prior to January 1, 2007. Thirteen articles met the inclusion criteria and 57 different variables were examined as predictors of safety violations. Study settings were healthcare delivery, commercial driving, aviation, mining, railroad, and construction. The predictors were categorized into individual characteristics, information/education/training, design to support worker needs, safety climate, competing goals, and problems with rules. None of the reviewed studies examined whether violations can improve system performance or safety. Methodological suggestions and a macroergonomic framework are offered for improving future studies of the epidemiology of safety violations.

A change management framework for macroergonomic field research.

With the proliferation of macroergonomic field research, it is time to carefully examine how such research should be managed and implemented. We argue that the importance of attending to high-quality implementation of field research is equal to that of methodological rigor. One way to systematically manage the implementation process is to adopt a change management framework, wherein the research project is conceptualized as an instance of organization-level change. Consequently, principles for successful organization-level change from the literature on change management can be used to guide successful field research implementation. This paper briefly reviews that literature, deriving 30 principles of successful change management, covering topics such as political awareness, assembling the change team, generating buy-in, and management support. For each principle, corresponding suggestions for macroergonomic field research practice are presented. We urge other researchers to further develop and adopt frameworks that guide the implementation of field research.