Nursing interventions to reduce medication errors in paediatrics and neonates: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a great concern to health care organisations as they are costly and pose a significant risk to patients. Children are three times more likely to be affected by medication errors than adults with medication administration error rates reported to be over 70%. OBJECTIVE: To identify nursing interventions to reduce medication administration errors and perform a meta-analysis. METHODS: Online databases; British Nursing Index (BNI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for relevant studies published between January 2000 to 2020. Studies with clear primary or secondary aims focusing on interventions to reduce medication administration errors in paediatrics, children and or neonates were included in the review. RESULTS: 442 studies were screened and18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven interventions were identified from included studies; education programmes, medication information services, clinical pharmacist involvement, double checking, barriers to reduce interruptions during drug calculation and preparation, implementation of smart pumps and improvement strategies. Educational interventional aspects were the most common identified in 13 out of 18 included studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated an associated 64% reduction in medicine administration errors post intervention (pooled OR 0.36 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.21-0.63) P = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Medication safety education is an important element of interventions to reduce administration errors. Medication errors are multifaceted that require a bundle interventional approach to address the complexities and dynamics relevant to the local context. It is imperative that causes of errors need to be identified prior to implementation of appropriate interventions.

Appetite stimulants for people with cystic fibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Chronic loss of appetite in cystic fibrosis concerns both individuals and families. Appetite stimulants have been used to help cystic fibrosis patients with chronic anorexia attain optimal body mass index and nutritional status. However, these may have adverse effects on clinical status. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this review is to systematically search for and evaluate evidence on the beneficial effects of appetite stimulants in the management of CF-related anorexia and synthesize reports of any side-effects. SEARCH METHODS: Trials were identified by searching the Cochrane Cystic Fibrosis and Genetic Disorders Group's Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, handsearching reference lists and contacting local and international experts.Last search of online databases: 01 April 2014.Last search of the Cystic Fibrosis Trials Register: 08 April 2014. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials of appetite stimulants, compared to placebo or no treatment for at least one month in adults and children with cystic fibrosis. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Authors independently extracted data and assessed the risk of bias within eligible trials. Meta-analyses were performed. MAIN RESULTS: Three trials (total of 47 recruited patients) comparing appetite stimulants (cyproheptadine hydrochloride and megesterol acetate) to placebo were included; the numbers of adults or children within each trial were not always reported. The risk of bias of the included trials was graded as moderate.A meta-analysis of all three trials showed appetite stimulants produced a larger increase in weight z score at three months compared to placebo, mean difference 0.61 (95% confidence interval 0.29 to 0.93) (P < 0.001) (n = 40) with no evidence of a difference in effect between two different appetite stimulants. One of these trials also reported a significant weight increase with megesterol acetate compared to placebo at six months (n = 17). The three trials reported no significant differences in forced expiratory volume at one second (per cent predicted) between the appetite stimulant groups and placebo at follow up, with durations ranging from two to nine months. A meta-analysis of two trials showed a significantly higher proportion of patients reporting increased appetite, odds ratio 45.25 (95% confidence interval 3.57 to 573.33) (P = 0.003) (n = 23), but the frequency of reported side effects was undetermined. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In the short term (six months) in adults and children, appetite stimulants improved only two of the outcomes in this review - weight (or weight z score) and appetite; and side effects were insufficiently reported to determine the full extent of their impact. Whilst the data may suggest the potential use of appetite stimulants in treating anorexia in adults and children with cystic fibrosis, this is based upon moderate quality data from a small number of trials and so this therapy cannot be conclusively recommended based upon the findings in the review. Clinicians need to be aware of the potential adverse effects of appetite stimulants and actively monitor any patients prescribed these medications accordingly.Research is needed to determine meaningful surrogate measures for appetite and define what constitutes quality weight gain. Future trials of appetite stimulants should use a validated measure of symptoms including a disease-specific instrument for measuring poor appetite. This review highlights the need for multicentred, adequately powered and well-designed trials to evaluate agents to safely increase appetite in people with cystic fibrosis and to establish the optimal mode of treatment.

Paediatric family activated rapid response interventions; qualitative systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Failure to recognise deterioration early which results in patient death, is considered failure to rescue and it is identified as one of the leading causes of harm to patients. It is recognised that patients and their families can often recognise changes within the child's condition before healthcare professionals. To mitigate the risk of failure to rescue and promote early intervention, family-activated rapid response systems are becoming widely acknowledged and accepted as part of family integrated care. OBJECTIVE: To identify current family-activated rapid response interventions in hospitalised paediatric patients and understand mechanisms by which family activation works. METHODS: A narrative systematic review of published studies was conducted. Seven online databases; AMED, CINHAL, EMBASE, EMCARE, HMIC, JBI, and Medline were searched for potentially relevant papers. The critical appraisal skills programme tool was used to assess methodological rigor and validity of included studies. RESULTS: Six studies met the predefined inclusion criteria. Five telephone family activation interventions were identified; Call for Help, medical emergency-teams, Condition HELP, rapid response teams, and family initiated rapid response. Principles underpinning all interventions were founded on a principal of granting families access to a process to escalate concerns to hospital emergency teams. Identified interventions outcomes and mechanisms include; patient safety, empowerment of families, partnership working/ family centred care, effective communication and better patient outcomes. Interventions lacked multi-lingual options. CONCLUSION: Family activation rapid response system are fundamental to family integrated care and enhancing patient safety. Underlying principles and concepts in delivering interventions are transferable across global healthcare system.

Developing a prototype digital risk mitigation pathway for children and young people admitted to acute paediatric NHS care in mental health crisis: Protocol of the Safety Assessment in Paediatric healthcare Environments (SAPhE) pathway study.

Background: Globally, there are increasing numbers of Children and young people (CYPs) experiencing a mental health crisis requiring admission to acute paediatric inpatient care. These CYPs can often experience fluctuating emotional states accompanied by urges to self-harm or attempt to end their life, leading to reduced safety and poorer experiences. Currently, in the UK National Health Service (NHS) there are no standardised, evidence-based interventions in acute paediatric care to mitigate or minimise immediate risk of self-harm and suicide in CYP admitted with mental health crisis. Objective: To outline the protocol for the SAPhE Pathway study which aims to: 1) identify and prioritise risk mitigation strategies to include in the digital prototype, 2) understand the feasibility of implementing a novel digital risk mitigation pathway in differing NHS contexts, and 3) co-create a prototype digital risk mitigation pathway. Methods: This is a multi-centre study uses a mixed-methods design. A systematic review and exploratory methods (interviews, surveys, and focus groups) will be used to identify the content and feasibility of implementing a digital risk mitigation pathway. Participants will include healthcare professionals, digital experts and CYP with experience of mental health conditions. Data will be collected between January 2022 and March 2023 and analysed using content and thematic analysis, case study, cross-case analysis for qualitative data and descriptive statistics for quantitative data. Findings will inform the experience-based co-design workshops. Ethics and Dissemination: The study received full ethical approval from NHS REC [Ref: 22/SC/0237 and 22/WM/0167]. Findings will be made available to all stakeholders using multiple approaches.

Identifying and Understanding the Non-Clinical Impacts of Delayed or Cancelled Surgery in Order to Inform Prioritisation Processes: A Scoping Review.

The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in significant delays to non-urgent elective surgery. Decision making regarding prioritisation for surgery is currently informed primarily by clinical urgency. The ways in which decision making should also consider potential social and economic harm arising from surgical delay are currently unclear. This scoping review aimed to identify evidence related to (i) the nature and prevalence of social and economic harm experienced by patients associated with delayed surgery, and (ii) any patient assessment tools that could measure the extent of, or predict, such social and economic harm. A rapid scoping review was undertaken following JBI methodological guidance. The following databases were searched in October 2020: AMED; BNI; CINAHL; EMBASE; EMCARE; HMIC; Medline; PsychINFO, Cochrane, and the JBI. A total of 21 publications were included. The findings were categorised into five themes: (i) employment, (ii) social function and leisure, (iii) finances, (iv) patients' experiences of waiting, and (v) assessment tools that could inform decision making. The findings suggest that, for some patients, waiting for surgery can include significant social, economic, and emotional hardship. Few validated assessment tools exist. There is an urgent need for more research on patients' experiences of surgical delay in order to inform a more holistic process of prioritising people on surgical waiting lists in the COVID-19 pandemic recovery stages.