Frequency and determinants of drug administration errors in the intensive care unit

Standardised drug labelling in intensive care: results of an international survey among ESICM members

PURPOSE

Standardised coloured drug labels may increase patient safety in the intensive care unit (ICU). The rates of adherence to standardised drug syringe labelling (DSL) in European and non-European ICUs, and the standards applied are not known. The aim of this survey among ESICM members was to assess if and what standardised drug syringe labelling is used, if the standards for drug syringe labelling are similar internationally and if intensivists expect that standardised DSL should be delivered by the pharmaceutical industry.

METHODS

A structured, web-based, anonymised survey on standardised DSL, performed among ESICM members (March-May 2011; Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01232088). Descriptive data analysis was performed and Fisher's exact test was applied where applicable.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-two submissions were analysed (20 % non-European). Thirty-five percent of the respondents reported that standardised drug labelling was used hospital-wide, and 39 % reported that standardised DSL was used in their ICU (Europe: Northern 53 %, Western 52 %, Eastern 17 %, Southern 22 %). The International Organization of Standardization (ISO) 26825 norm in its original form was used by 30 %, an adapted version by 19 % and local versions by 45 %; 6 % used labels that were included in the drug's packaging. Eighty percent wished that the pharmaceutical industry supplied ISO 26825 norm labelling together with the drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Standardised DSL is not widely applied in European and non-European ICUs and mostly does not adhere strictly to the ISO norm. The frequency and quality of DSL differs to a great extent among European regions. This leaves much room for improvement.

Investigating the safety of medication administration in adult critical care settings

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are recognized causes of patient morbidity and mortality in hospital settings, and can occur at any stage of the medication management process. Medication administration errors are reported to occur more frequently in critical care settings, and can be associated with severe consequences. However, patient safety research tends to focus on accident causations rather than organizational factors which enhance patient safety and health care resilience to unsafe practice. The Organizational Safety Space Model was developed for high-risk industries to investigate factors that influence organizational safety. Its application in health care settings may offer a unique approach to understand organizational safety in the health care context, particularly in investigating the safety of medication administration in adult critical care settings.

PURPOSE

This literature review explores the development and use of the Organizational Safety Space Model in the industrial context, and considers its application in investigating the safety of medication administration in adult critical care settings. SEARCH STRATEGIES (INCLUSION AND EXCLUSION CRITERIA): CINAHL, Medline, British Nursing Index (BNI) and PsychInfo databases were searched for peer-reviewed papers, published in English, from 1970 to 2011 with relevance to organizational safety and medication administration in critical care, using the key words: organization, safety, nurse, critical care and medication administration. Archaeological searching, including grey literature and governmental documents, was also carried out. From the identified 766 articles, 51 studies were considered relevant.

CONCLUSION

The Organizational Safety Space Model offers a productive, conceptual system framework to critically analyse the wider organizational issues, which may influence the safety of medication administration and organizational resilience to accidents. However, the model needs to be evaluated for its application in health care settings in general and critical care in particular. Nurses would offer a valuable insight in explaining how the Organizational Safety Space Model can be used to analyse the organizational contributions towards medication administration in adult critical care settings.

Spreading a medication administration intervention organizationwide in six hospitals

BACKGROUND

Six hospitals from the San Francisco Bay Area participated in a 12-month quality improvement project conducted by the Integrated Nurse Leadership Program (INLP). A quality improvement intervention that focused on improving medication administration accuracy was spread from two pilot units to all inpatient units in the hospitals.

METHODS

INLP developed a 12-month curriculum, presented in a combination of off-site training sessions and hospital-based training and consultant-led meetings, to teach clinicians the key skills needed to drive organizationwide change. Each hospital established a nurse-led project team, as well as unit teams to address six safety processes designed to improve medication administration accuracy: compare medication to the medication administration record; keep medication labeled throughout; check two patient identifications; explain drug to patient (if applicable); chart immediately after administration; and protect process from distractions and interruptions.

RESULTS

From baseline until one year after project completion, the six hospitals improved their medication accuracy rates, on average, from 83.4% to 98.0% in the spread units. The spread units also improved safety processes overall from 83.1% to 97.2%. During the same time, the initial pilot units also continued to improve accuracy from 94.0% to 96.8% and safety processes overall from 95.3% to 97.2%.

CONCLUSION

With thoughtful planning, engaging those doing the work early and focusing on the "human side of change" along with technical knowledge of improvement methodologies, organizations can spread initiatives enterprisewide. This program required significant training of frontline workers in problem-solving skills, leading change, team management, data tracking, and communication.

Knowledge is power: studying critical incidents in intensive care

Despite their difficult definition and taxonomy, it is imperative to study critical incidents in intensive care, since they may be followed by adverse events and compromised patient safety. Identifying recurring patterns and factors contributing to critical incidents constitutes a prerequisite for developing effective preventive strategies. Self-reporting methodology, although widely used for studying critical incidents, has been criticized in terms of reliability and may considerably underestimate both overall frequency and specific types of them. Promotion of non-blaming culture, analysis of critical incident reports and development of clinical recommendations are expected to minimize critical incidents in the future.

[Survey of drug dispensing errors in hospital wards]

Medication errors occur very frequently. The limited knowledge of contributing factors and risks prevents the development and testing of successful preventive strategies.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the differences between the ordered and dispensed drugs, and to identify the risks during medication.

METHODS

Prospective direct observation at two inpatient hospital wards.

RESULTS

The number of observed doses was 775 and the number of ordered doses was 806. It was found that from the total opportunities of 803 errors 114 errors occurred in dispensed drugs corresponding to an error rate of 14.1%. Among the different types of errors, the most important errors were: dispensing inappropriate doses (25.4%), unauthorized tablet halving or crushing (24.6%), omission errors (16.4%) and dispensing an active ingredient different from the ordered (14.2%). 87% of drug dispensing errors were considered as errors with minor consequences, while 13% of errors were potentially serious.

CONCLUSIONS

Direct observation of the drug dispensing procedure appears to be an appropriate method to observe errors in medication of hospital wards. The results of the study and the identified risks are worth to be reconsidered and prevention measures should be applied to everyday health care practice to improve patient safety.

Medicine administration errors and their severity in secondary care older persons' ward: a multi-centre observational study

AIM AND OBJECTIVES

To assess the severity of medicine administration errors to older patients.

BACKGROUND

Severity of medicine administration errors has been determined in a variety of settings but not in care-of-older-person wards, which this study aims to do.

DESIGN

Undisguised observational study.

PARTICIPANTS

Sixty-two nurses were observed administering oral medicines to 625 patients.

INTERVENTIONS

Data were collected on the preparation and administration of oral medicines. Thirty-five cases of error were selected and analysed for their severity.

RESULTS

In the 65 drug rounds observed 2129 potential drug administrations were made to 625 patients, of which 817 doses (38.4%) were given incorrectly (95% CI = 36.3-40.4). The overall mean harm score of the 35 incidents analysed was 4.1 (range 1.1-8.6, SD 1.8) on a scale of 0-10.

CONCLUSIONS

The number and severity of MAEs observed is high compared with previous studies.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

There is a need to decrease the number and severity of MAEs, by increasing nurse awareness and error reporting.

Medication wrong-route administrations in relation to medical prescriptions

This study analyzes the influence of medical prescriptions' writing on the occurrence of medication errors in the medical wards of five Brazilian hospitals. This descriptive study used data obtained from a multicenter study conducted in 2005. The population was composed of 1,425 medication errors and the sample included 92 routes through which medication was wrongly administered. The pharmacological classes most frequently involved in errors were cardiovascular agents (31.5%), medication that acts on the nervous system (23.9%), and on the digestive system and metabolism (13.0%). In relation to the prescription items that may have contributed to such errors, we verified that 91.3% of prescriptions contained acronyms and abbreviations; patient information was missing in 22.8%, and 4.3% did not include the date and were effaced. Medication wrong-route administrations are common in Brazilian hospitals and around the world. It is well established that these situations may result in severe adverse events for patients, including death.

The impact of type of manual medication cart filling method on the frequency of medication administration errors: a prospective before and after study

BACKGROUND

The medication cart can be filled using an automated system or a manual method and when using a manual method the medication can be arranged either by round time or by medication name. For the manual methods, it is hypothesized that the latter method would result in a lower frequency of medication administration errors because nurses are forced to read the medication labels, but evidence for this hypothesis is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to compare the frequency of medication administration errors of two different manual medication cart filling methods, namely arranging medication by round time or by medication name.

DESIGN

A prospective, observational study with a before-after design.

PARTICIPANTS AND SETTINGS

Eighty-six patients who stayed on an orthopaedic ward in one university medical centre in the Netherlands were included.

METHODS

Disguised observation was used to detect medication administration errors. The medication cart filling method in usual care was to fill the cart with medication arranged by round time. The intervention was the implementation of the second medication cart filling method, where the medication cart was filled by arranging medicines by their names. The primary outcome was the frequency of medication administrations with one or more error(s) after the intervention compared with before the intervention. The secondary outcome was the frequency of subtypes of medication administration errors.

RESULTS

After the intervention 170 of 740 (23.0%) medication administrations with one or more medication administration error(s) were observed compared to 114 of 589 (19.4%) before the intervention (odds ratio 1.24 [95% confidence interval 0.95-1.62]). The distribution of subtypes of medication administration errors before and after the intervention was statistically significantly different (p<0.001). Analysis of subtypes revealed more omissions and wrong time errors after the intervention than before the intervention. Unauthorized medication errors were detected more frequently before the intervention than after the intervention.

CONCLUSION

The frequency of medication administration errors with the medication cart filling method where the medication is arranged by name was not statistically significantly different compared to the medication cart filling method where the medication is arranged by round time.

Towards IV drug standardization in critical care

Local infusion practice within critical care has evolved over time, and one example of this is the wide variation in concentrations of drug infusions within critical care. While there are many similarities between critical care units, there are also many differences. Often drug infusions are used outside their product licence and, because of the diversity in practice, manufacturers are unlikely to license multiple preparations of even the most commonly used infusions. Critical care nurses spend many hours every day preparing and administering intravenous infusions. Much time could be saved if the infusions were available as a ready-to-use solution. This would also reduce the risk of errors that occur during the preparation and administration of medication infusions. This article describes a national project to achieve consensus on the strengths of drug infusions used within UK critical care units. Having agreed on standard solutions, it is hoped that manufacturers will seek licences for commonly used infusions and work towards mass production of these products. Off the shelf, ready-to-use infusions of commonly used medications could become a reality.

Automated drug dispensing system reduces medication errors in an intensive care setting

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to assess the impact of an automated dispensing system on the incidence of medication errors related to picking, preparation, and administration of drugs in a medical intensive care unit. We also evaluated the clinical significance of such errors and user satisfaction.

DESIGN

Preintervention and postintervention study involving a control and an intervention medical intensive care unit.

SETTING

Two medical intensive care units in the same department of a 2,000-bed university hospital.

PATIENTS

Adult medical intensive care patients.

INTERVENTIONS

After a 2-month observation period, we implemented an automated dispensing system in one of the units (study unit) chosen randomly, with the other unit being the control.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The overall error rate was expressed as a percentage of total opportunities for error. The severity of errors was classified according to National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention categories by an expert committee. User satisfaction was assessed through self-administered questionnaires completed by nurses. A total of 1,476 medications for 115 patients were observed. After automated dispensing system implementation, we observed a reduced percentage of total opportunities for error in the study compared to the control unit (13.5% and 18.6%, respectively; p<.05); however, no significant difference was observed before automated dispensing system implementation (20.4% and 19.3%, respectively; not significant). Before-and-after comparisons in the study unit also showed a significantly reduced percentage of total opportunities for error (20.4% and 13.5%; p<.01). An analysis of detailed opportunities for error showed a significant impact of the automated dispensing system in reducing preparation errors (p<.05). Most errors caused no harm (National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention category C). The automated dispensing system did not reduce errors causing harm. Finally, the mean for working conditions improved from 1.0±0.8 to 2.5±0.8 on the four-point Likert scale.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of an automated dispensing system reduced overall medication errors related to picking, preparation, and administration of drugs in the intensive care unit. Furthermore, most nurses favored the new drug dispensation organization.

Adverse drug events in intensive care units: risk factors, impact, and the role of team care

Advances in diagnostic tests, technological interventions, and pharmacotherapy have resulted in spectacular results for many intensive care unit (ICU) patients who, in earlier generations, would have succumbed to their critical illness. At the same time, the complexity and intensity of care required for ICU patients is also associated with greater risks for harm resulting from care. As in other inpatient areas, medications are the most common type of therapy in ICUs and are also associated with the most frequent type of ICU adverse events. Critically ill patients are at high risk for adverse drug events for many reasons, including the complexity of their disease that creates challenges in drug dosing, their vulnerability to rapid changes in pharmacotherapy, the intensive care environment providing ample distractions and opportunity for error, the administration of complex drug regimens, the numerous high-alert medications that they receive, and the mode of drug administration. The clinical outcomes of adverse drug events can result in end-organ damage and even death. The costs of an adverse drug event can be substantial to healthcare systems with an additional $6,000-$9,000 for each event. The multiprofessional patient care team is one approach to promoting patient safety in the ICU.

Medical error and decision making: Learning from the past and present in intensive care

BACKGROUND

Human error occurs in every occupation. Medical errors may result in a near miss or an actual injury to a patient that has nothing to do with the underlying medical condition. Intensive care has one of the highest incidences of medical error and patient injury in any specialty medical area; thought to be related to the rapidly changing patient status and complex diagnoses and treatments.

PURPOSE

The aims of this paper are to: (1) outline the definition, classifications and aetiology of medical error; (2) summarise key findings from the literature with a specific focus on errors arising from intensive care areas; and (3) conclude with an outline of approaches for analysing clinical information to determine adverse events and inform practice change in intensive care.

DATA SOURCE

Database searches of articles and textbooks using keywords: medical error, patient safety, decision making and intensive care. Sociology and psychology literature cited therein.

FINDINGS

Critically ill patients require numerous medications, multiple infusions and procedures. Although medical errors are often detected by clinicians at the bedside, organisational processes and systems may contribute to the problem. A systems approach is thought to provide greater insight into the contributory factors and potential solutions to avoid preventable adverse events.

CONCLUSION

It is recommended that a variety of clinical information and research techniques are used as a priority to prevent hospital acquired injuries and address patient safety concerns in intensive care.

Drug administration errors in paediatric wards: a direct observation approach

Paediatric patients are more vulnerable to drug administration errors due to a lack of appropriate drug dosages and strengths for use in this group of patients. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to determine the extent and types of drug administration errors in two paediatric wards and to identify measures to reduce such errors. A researcher was stationed in two paediatric wards of a teaching hospital to observe all drugs administered to paediatric inpatients in each of the ward, for 1 day in a week over ten consecutive weeks. All data were recorded in a data collection form and then compared with the actual drugs and dosages prescribed for the patients. Of the 857 drug administrations observed, 100 doses had errors, and this gave an error rate of 11.7% [95% confidence interval (CI) 9.5-13.9%]. If wrong time administration errors were excluded, the error rate reduced to 7.8% (95% CI 6.0-9.6%). The most common types of drug administration errors were incorrect time of administration (28.8%), followed by incorrect drug preparation (26%), omission errors (16.3%) and incorrect dose (11.5%). None of the errors observed were considered as potentially life threatening, although 40.4% could possibly cause patient harm. Drug administration errors are as common in paediatric wards in Malaysia as in other countries. Double-checking should be conducted, as this could reduce drug administration errors by about 20%, but collaborative efforts between all healthcare professionals are essential.

Impact of simulation-based learning on medication error rates in critically ill patients

PURPOSE

To compare medication administration error rates before and after the provision of educational sessions using either traditional didactic lecture or simulation-based training.

METHODS

A single-center, parallel, controlled, prospective study conducted in adult coronary critical care (CCU) and medical intensive care units (MICU). Twenty-four nurses were observed administering medications. Documentation included drug name, dose, route, time and technique during observation and active medication orders in the patient's chart. A direct observation method was completed at baseline and repeated twice after the interventions. Data obtained during observation were analyzed for medication administration error rates. Interventions were two types of educational sessions with content developed from baseline medication administration error data: simulation-based training for CCU nurses and a didactic lecture for MICU nurses. Quizzes completed before and after the interventions were used to assess knowledge.

RESULTS

A total of 880 doses (402 CCU, 478 MICU) were observed. After the simulation-based educational intervention in the CCU, medication administration error rates decreased from 30.8 to 4.0% (p < 0.001) in the initial post-intervention observation and were sustained in the final post-intervention observation (30.8 to 6.2%; p < 0.001). The error rate in the MICU after the didactic lecture intervention was not significantly different from the baseline and increased in the final post-intervention observation from 20.8 to 36.7% (p = 0.002). Mean quiz scores were significantly improved after education sessions in both ICUs.

CONCLUSIONS

Simulation-based learning provides a significant advantage to patient care through the reduction of medication administration errors compared to lecture style education.

The pathophysiology of medication errors: how and where they arise

1. Errors arise when an action is intended but not performed; errors that arise from poor planning or inadequate knowledge are characterized as mistakes; those that arise from imperfect execution of well-formulated plans are called slips when an erroneous act is committed and lapses when a correct act is omitted. 2. Some tasks are intrinsically prone to error. Examples are tasks that are unfamiliar to the operator or performed under pressure. Tasks that require the calculation of a dosage or dilution are especially susceptible to error. 3. The tasks of prescribing, preparation, and administration of medicines are complex, and are carried out within a complex system; errors can occur at each of many steps and the error rate for the overall process is therefore high. 4. The error rate increases when health-care professionals are inexperienced, inattentive, rushed, distracted, fatigued, or depressed; orthopaedic surgeons and nurses may be more likely than other health-care professionals to make medication errors. 5. Medication error rates in hospital are higher in paediatric departments and intensive care units than elsewhere. 6. Rates of medication errors may be higher in very young or very old patients. 7. Intravenous antibiotics are the drugs most commonly involved in medication errors in hospital; antiplatelet agents, diuretics, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs are most likely to account for 'preventable admissions'. 8. Computers effectively reduce the rates of easily counted errors. It is not clear whether they can save lives lost through rare but dangerous errors in the medication process.

Do calculation errors by nurses cause medication errors in clinical practice? A literature review

This review aims to examine the literature available to ascertain whether medication errors in clinical practice are the result of nurses' miscalculating drug dosages. The research studies highlighting poor calculation skills of nurses and student nurses have been tested using written drug calculation tests in formal classroom settings [Kapborg, I., 1994. Calculation and administration of drug dosage by Swedish nurses, student nurses and physicians. International Journal for Quality in Health Care 6(4): 389 -395; Hutton, M., 1998. Nursing Mathematics: the importance of application Nursing Standard 13(11): 35-38; Weeks, K., Lynne, P., Torrance, C., 2000. Written drug dosage errors made by students: the threat to clinical effectiveness and the need for a new approach. Clinical Effectiveness in Nursing 4, 20-29]; Wright, K., 2004. Investigation to find strategies to improve student nurses' maths skills. British Journal Nursing 13(21) 1280-1287; Wright, K., 2005. An exploration into the most effective way to teach drug calculation skills to nursing students. Nurse Education Today 25, 430-436], but there have been no reviews of the literature on medication errors in practice that specifically look to see whether the medication errors are caused by nurses' poor calculation skills. The databases Medline, CINAHL, British Nursing Index (BNI), Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA) and Archives and Cochrane reviews were searched for research studies or systematic reviews which reported on the incidence or causes of drug errors in clinical practice. In total 33 articles met the criteria for this review. There were no studies that examined nurses' drug calculation errors in practice. As a result studies and systematic reviews that investigated the types and causes of drug errors were examined to establish whether miscalculations by nurses were the causes of errors. The review found insufficient evidence to suggest that medication errors are caused by nurses' poor calculation skills. Of the 33 studies reviewed only five articles specifically recorded information relating to calculation errors and only two of these detected errors using the direct observational approach. The literature suggests that there are other more pressing aspects of nurses' preparation and administration of medications which are contributing to medication errors in practice that require more urgent attention and calls into question the current focus on calculation and numeracy skills of pre registration and qualified nurses (NMC 2008). However, more research is required into the calculation errors in practice. In particular there is a need for a direct observational study on paediatric nurses as there are presently none examining this area of practice.

The effect of an intervention aimed at reducing errors when administering medication through enteral feeding tubes in an institution for individuals with intellectual disability

BACKGROUND

Previous studies, both in hospitals and in institutions for clients with an intellectual disability (ID), have shown that medication errors at the administration stage are frequent, especially when medication has to be administered through an enteral feeding tube. In hospitals a specially designed intervention programme has proven to be effective in reducing these feeding tube-related medication errors, but the effect of such a programme within an institution for clients with an ID is unknown. Therefore, a study was designed to measure the influence of such an intervention programme on the number of medication administration errors in clients with an ID who also have enteral feeding tubes.

METHODS

A before-after study design with disguised observation to document administration errors was used. The study was conducted from February to June 2008 within an institution for individuals with an ID in the Western part of The Netherlands. Included were clients with enteral feeding tubes. The intervention consisted of advice on medication administration through enteral feeding tubes by the pharmacist, a training programme and introduction of a 'medication through tube' box containing proper materials for crushing and suspending tablets. The outcome measure was the frequency of medication administration errors, comparing the pre-intervention period with the post-intervention period.

RESULTS

A total of 245 medication administrations in six clients (by 23 nurse attendants) have been observed in the pre-intervention measurement period and 229 medication administrations in five clients (by 20 nurse attendants) have been observed in the post-intervention period. Before the intervention, 158 (64.5%) medication administration errors were observed, and after the intervention, this decreased to 69 (30.1%). Of all potential confounders and effect modifiers, only 'medication dispensed in automated dispensing system ("robot") packaging' contributed to the multivariate model; effect modification was shown for this determinant. Multilevel analysis using this multivariate model resulted in an odds ratio of 0.33 (95% confidence interval 0.13-0.71) for the error percentage in the post-intervention period compared with the pre-intervention period.

CONCLUSIONS

The intervention was found to be effective in an institution for clients with an ID. However, additional efforts are needed to reduce the proportion of administration errors which is still high after the intervention.

Effect of bar-code-assisted medication administration on medication administration errors and accuracy in multiple patient care areas

PURPOSE

The effect of a commercially available bar-code-assisted medication administration (BCMA) technology on six indicators of medication administration accuracy and nine types of medication administration errors in distinct patient care areas were studied.

METHODS

This prospective, before-and-after, observational study was conducted in two medical-surgical units, one medical intensive care unit (ICU), and one surgical ICU of a 386-bed academic teaching hospital. Nursing staff were observed administering medications one month before and three months after implementation of BCMA technology. Observations were conducted by two pharmacists and four pharmacy students on weekdays and weekends. Medication administration accuracy was measured using the accuracy indicator of the California Nursing Outcomes Coalition.

RESULTS

The majority of medication administrations occurred during the 9 a.m. medication round. After BCMA implementation in the medical-surgical units, improved adherence to patient identification policies was observed, but more distractions of the nursing staff occurred and the medications administered were less frequently explained to the patient. Although an increase in wrong-time errors was observed in the medical-surgical units, the total number of medication errors did not change. When wrong-time errors were excluded, the rate of medication errors decreased by 58%. In the ICUs, the charting of medication administration improved after BCMA implementation, but total medication errors and wrong-time errors did not change.

CONCLUSION

Implementing BCMA technology decreased medication administration errors in medical-surgical units but not in ICUs when time errors were excluded. BCMA technology affected different types of medication administration errors in different patient care areas.

[Safety and quality in intensive care medicine]

The safety and quality care are two attributes of the health care that are closely intertwined. Quality is a feature of the system that delivers health care, thereby improving it, we need a proper reorganization teamwork. Measurements of quality are intended to assess whether the process of health care reaches the desired objectives, while avoiding the processes that predispose to harm the patient. The critically ill patients are vulnerable to medical errors, and may experience side effects preventable, often associated with: medications, mechanical ventilation, and intravascular devices. The evidence currently available suggest that the safety and quality of care can be improved. In this article presents some of the strategies and interventions developed to optimize the processes of care in critically ill patients, and improve the safety culture in the ICU.

Time-dependent drug-drug interaction alerts in care provider order entry: software may inhibit medication error reductions

Time-dependent drug-drug interactions (TDDIs) are drug combinations that result in a decreased drug effect due to coadministration of a second drug. Such interactions can be prevented by separately administering the drugs. This study attempted to reduce drug administration errors due to overridden TDDIs in a care provider order entry (CPOE) system. In four periods divided over two studies, logged TDDIs were investigated by reviewing the time intervals prescribed in the CPOE and recorded on the patient chart. The first study showed significant drug administration error reduction from 56.4 to 36.2% (p<0.05), whereas the second study was not successful (46.7 and 45.2%; p>0.05). Despite interventions, drug administration errors still occurred in more than one third of cases and prescribing errors in 79-87%. Probably the low alert specificity, the unclear alert information content, and the inability of the software to support safe and efficient TDDI alert handling all diminished correct prescribing, and consequently, insufficiently reduced drug administration errors.

Effect of bar-code-assisted medication administration on medication error rates in an adult medical intensive care unit

PURPOSE

The effect of bar-code-assisted medication administration (BCMA) on the rate of medication errors in adult patients in a medical intensive care unit (ICU) was studied.

METHODS

Medication errors were identified in a community teaching hospital medical ICU using a direct observation technique whereby nurses were observed administering medications. Observations occurred for four consecutive 24-hour periods one month before and four months after the implementation of BCMA. Errors in the following categories were recorded: wrong drug, wrong administration time, wrong route, wrong dose, omission, administration of a drug with no order, and documentation error. Two evaluators reviewed all errors for accuracy. Medication error rates were calculated and compared by determining the number of medication errors identified per number of medications administered (observed) preimplementation and postimplementation of BCMA. Statistical analyses were conducted to determine significance.

RESULTS

A total of 1465 medication administrations were observed (775 preimplementation and 690 postimplementation) for 92 patients (45 preimplementation and 47 postimplementation). The medication error rate was reduced by 56% after the implementation of BCMA (19.7% versus 8.7% , p < 0.001). This benefit was related to a reduction associated with errors of wrong administration time. Wrong administration time errors decreased from 18.8% during preimplementation to 7.5% postimplementation (p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in other error types.

CONCLUSION

The implementation of BCMA significantly reduced the number of wrong administration time errors in an adult medical ICU.

Towards Standardisation of Drug Infusion Concentrations in UK Critical Care Units

There is wide variation in infusion practice in UK critical care units. Standardising infusion concentrations may lead to efficiency gains through reduced training burdens, common nomenclature, reductions in error rates and mass production of ready-to-use products by the pharmaceutical industry. A proposed list of standard concentrations for 20 medications given by infusion was produced. Critical care units were surveyed to assess the acceptability of the list for adoption as a national standard; 164 critical care units responded (63% of UK NHS trusts). High acceptance of the list has been shown, with the exception of concentrations of adrenaline, potassium and phosphate where further work is required. The proposed concentrations of the remaining 17 medications should be adopted as a national standard.

Medication administration errors in nursing homes using an automated medication dispensing system

OBJECTIVE To identify the frequency of medication administration errors as well as their potential risk factors in nursing homes using a distribution robot. DESIGN The study was a prospective, observational study conducted within three nursing homes in the Netherlands caring for 180 individuals. MEASUREMENTS Medication errors were measured using the disguised observation technique. Types of medication errors were described. The correlation between several potential risk factors and the occurrence of medication errors was studied to identify potential causes for the errors. RESULTS In total 2,025 medication administrations to 127 clients were observed. In these administrations 428 errors were observed (21.2%). The most frequently occurring types of errors were use of wrong administration techniques (especially incorrect crushing of medication and not supervising the intake of medication) and wrong time errors (administering the medication at least 1 h early or late).The potential risk factors female gender (odds ratio (OR) 1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05-1.83), ATC medication class antibiotics (OR 11.11; 95% CI 2.66-46.50), medication crushed (OR 7.83; 95% CI 5.40-11.36), number of dosages/day/client (OR 1.03; 95% CI 1.01-1.05), nursing home 2 (OR 3.97; 95% CI 2.86-5.50), medication not supplied by distribution robot (OR 2.92; 95% CI 2.04-4.18), time classes "7-10 am" (OR 2.28; 95% CI 1.50-3.47) and "10 am-2 pm" (OR 1.96; 1.18-3.27) and day of the week "Wednesday" (OR 1.46; 95% CI 1.03-2.07) are associated with a higher risk of administration errors. CONCLUSIONS Medication administration in nursing homes is prone to many errors. This study indicates that the handling of the medication after removing it from the robot packaging may contribute to this high error frequency, which may be reduced by training of nurse attendants, by automated clinical decision support and by measures to reduce workload.

Errors in administration of parenteral drugs in intensive care units: multinational prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To assess on a multinational level the frequency, characteristics, contributing factors, and preventive measures of administration errors in parenteral medication in intensive care units.

DESIGN

Observational, prospective, 24 hour cross sectional study with self reporting by staff.

SETTING

113 intensive care units in 27 countries.

PARTICIPANTS

1328 adults in intensive care.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Number of errors; impact of errors; distribution of error characteristics; distribution of contributing and preventive factors.

RESULTS

861 errors affecting 441 patients were reported: 74.5 (95% confidence interval 69.5 to 79.4) events per 100 patient days. Three quarters of the errors were classified as errors of omission. Twelve patients (0.9% of the study population) experienced permanent harm or died because of medication errors at the administration stage. In a multiple logistic regression with patients as the unit of analysis, odds ratios for the occurrence of at least one parenteral medication error were raised for number of organ failures (odds ratio per increase of one organ failure: 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.34); use of any intravenous medication (yes v no: 2.73, 1.39 to 5.36); number of parenteral administrations (per increase of one parenteral administration: 1.06, 1.04 to 1.08); typical interventions in patients in intensive care (yes v no: 1.50, 1.14 to 1.96); larger intensive care unit (per increase of one bed: 1.01, 1.00 to 1.02); number of patients per nurse (per increase of one patient: 1.30, 1.03 to 1.64); and occupancy rate (per 10% increase: 1.03, 1.00 to 1.05). Odds ratios for the occurrence of parenteral medication errors were decreased for presence of basic monitoring (yes v no: 0.19, 0.07 to 0.49); an existing critical incident reporting system (yes v no: 0.69, 0.53 to 0.90); an established routine of checks at nurses' shift change (yes v no: 0.68, 0.52 to 0.90); and an increased ratio of patient turnover to the size of the unit (per increase of one patient: 0.73, 0.57 to 0.93).

CONCLUSIONS

Parenteral medication errors at the administration stage are common and a serious safety problem in intensive care units. With the increasing complexity of care in critically ill patients, organisational factors such as error reporting systems and routine checks can reduce the risk for such errors.

Is the principle of a stable Heinrich ratio a myth? A multimethod analysis

BACKGROUND

Safety improvements are sometimes based on the premise that introducing measures to combat minor or no-harm incidents proportionately reduces the incidence of major incidents involving harm. This is in line with the principle of the Heinrich ratio, which asserts that there is a relatively fixed ratio between the incidence of no-harm incidents, minor incidents and major incidents. This principle has been advocated as a means of targeting and evaluating new safety initiatives.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Both thought experimentation and analysis of empirical data were used to examine the plausibility of this principle. A descriptive statistical analysis was carried out using triangle plots to display the relative frequencies of the occurrence of safety incidents classified as minor, moderate or severe.

FINDINGS

Thought experiments indicated that the principle of a fixed Heinrich ratio has a dubious logical foundation. Analysis of emergency department attendance and studies of medication errors demonstrated marked variation in the relative ratios of different outcomes. Triangle plots of UK road traffic accident data revealed a hitherto unrecognized systematic pattern of change that contradicts the principle of the Heinrich ratio.

INTERPRETATION

This study of the principle of a fixed Heinrich ratio invalidates it: introducing measures to reduce the incidence of minor incidents will not inevitably reduce the incidence of major incidents pro rata. Any safety policies based on the assumption that the Heinrich ratio is true need to be rethought.

The preparation and administration of intravenous drugs before and after protocol implementation

OBJECTIVES

This paper reports on a pilot study examining the incidence of nurses' errors in preparation and administration of intravenous drugs. Furthermore, the study aimed to evaluate the short-term effects of implementation of a new protocol for preparation and administration of intravenous drugs.

SETTING

Two nursing departments of internal medicine at a 953 beds University Medical Centre in The Netherlands.

METHODS

By means of a prospective, quasi-experimental design, nurses were observed during the process of preparation and administration of intravenous drugs. Observation was performed before and after the implementation of a new protocol. Seventy-two nurses at two nursing departments were observed during the study.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

A mean pre-test and post-test quality score at two departments of internal medicine.

RESULTS

At baseline, average quality scores for nurses at the two departments were 64 (intervention ward) and 67 (control ward) on a 0-100 quality scale. The pre-test quality scores were not statistically significant for the two nursing wards (T = 1.36, df = 55, P = 0.18). After the implementation of the new protocol, nurses at the intervention ward scored better (72) than nurses at the control ward (69). The mean score at the intervention ward was significantly higher than the score in nurses of the control ward (T = -2.20, df = 53, P = 0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

The number of errors in the preparation and administration of intravenous drugs is high. This study shows that implementing a protocol for the preparation and administration of these drugs can reduce the number of errors.

Oral tetridamine exposures

OBJECTIVE

Tetridamine is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug of the class indazols used topically as co-adjuvant for vaginitis. No previous data have been published about tetridamine overdoses.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of single ingestions of tetridamine vaginal douches reported to the Spanish Poison Control Centre from January 1991 to December 2003.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven cases met the inclusion criteria; 89.6% of the patients were over age 14 years. Exposures primarily involved female patients (94.4%). In 87% of cases, the tetridamine was ingested when it was mistaken for an oral preparation or for an oral antiseptic. The rest were unintentional exposures in children (10.4%) or suicide attempts (2.6%). Clinical effects, present in 17 patients, were mainly gastrointestinal (11 patients) followed by neurological (3 patients) or both (3 patients). The most common symptom was vomiting, followed by nausea, abdominal pain, and headache. One woman who ingested 4 g in a suicidal attempt became comatose.

CONCLUSION

This is the first report of tetridamine overdoses. An effort should be made by physicians and pharmacists to explain clearly the correct directions for the use of vaginal irrigation preparations.

Clinical review: medication errors in critical care

Medication errors in critical care are frequent, serious, and predictable. Critically ill patients are prescribed twice as many medications as patients outside of the intensive care unit (ICU) and nearly all will suffer a potentially life-threatening error at some point during their stay. The aim of this article is to provide a basic review of medication errors in the ICU, identify risk factors for medication errors, and suggest strategies to prevent errors and manage their consequences.

Classification of adverse events occurring in a surgical intensive care unit

INTRODUCTION

We aimed to describe the preventability and provider specificity of surgical intensive care unit (SICU) deaths and complications compared with those in a cohort of trauma patients.

METHODS

Data were collected on all trauma and SICU admissions from July 1, 2001, to June 30, 2004, from administrative (Trauma Base and Project Impact) and morbidity databases. Services were protocol driven and staffed by in-house attendings. Performance improvement assessments were made by consensus. Deaths and complications were classified as preventable, potentially preventable, or nonpreventable, and provider-specific or not. Statistical significance was established at the P < .05 level.

RESULTS

One hundred sixty-eight deaths (5.6% rate), 464 procedure-related, and 694 non-procedure-related complications were noted in 2969 SICU patients compared with 166 deaths (3.6% rate), 178 procedure-related, and 261 non-procedure-related complications in 4,655 trauma patients. Thirty-one percent of SICU deaths were preventable/potentially preventable compared with 14% of trauma deaths, but only 1.9% was attributable to the SICU provider. SICU complications were less frequently preventable/potentially preventable than in trauma patients (52% versus 61%) and less often provider-specific (5% versus 19%).

CONCLUSIONS

SICU complications are deemed preventable less often than in trauma patients and, if so, infrequently incriminate the SICU provider. Preventable and potentially preventable SICU deaths are rarely attributed to SICU care. These data suggest that SICU performance improvement should focus on systems solutions and pre-SICU care.

Medication administration discrepancies persist despite electronic ordering

Background Up to 38% of inpatient medication errors occur at the administration stage. Although they reduce prescribing errors, computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems do not prevent administration errors or timing discrepancies. This study determined the degree to which CPOE medication orders matched actual dose administration times. METHODS At a 658-bed academic hospital with CPOE but lacking electronic medication administration charting, authors randomly selected adult patients with eligible medication orders from historical 1999-2003 CPOE log files. Retrospective manual chart audits compared expected (from CPOE) and actual timing of medication administrations. Outcomes included: dose omissions, median lag times between ordered and charted administrations, unauthorized doses, wrong dose errors, and the rate of nurses' medication schedule shifting. RESULTS Dose omissions occurred in 756 of 6019 (12.6%) audited administration opportunities; only 313 of the omissions (5.2% of opportunities) were unexplained. Wrong doses and unexpected doses occurred for 0.1% and 0.7% of opportunities, respectively. Median lag from expected first dose to actual charted administration time was 27 minutes (IQR 0-127). Nursing staff shifted from ordered to alternate administration schedules for 10.7% of regularly scheduled recurring medication orders. Chart review identified reasons for dose omissions, delays, and dose shifting. CONCLUSION Inpatient CPOE orders are legible and conveyed electronically to nurses and the pharmacy. Nonetheless, ward-based medication administrations do not consistently occur as ordered. Medication administration discrepancies are likely to persist even after implementing CPOE and bar-coded medication administration unless recommended interventions are made to address issues such as determining the true urgency of medication administration, avoiding overlapping duplicative medication orders, and developing a safe means for shifting dosing schedules.

Drug administration errors in an institution for individuals with intellectual disability: an observational study

BACKGROUND

Medication errors can result in harm, unless barriers to prevent them are present. Drug administration errors are less likely to be prevented, because they occur in the last stage of the drug distribution process. This is especially the case in non-alert patients, as patients often form the final barrier to prevention of errors. Therefore, a study was set up aimed at identifying the frequency of drug administration errors and determinants for these errors in an institution for individuals with intellectual disability (ID).

METHODS

This observational study ('disguised observation') was conducted within an institution in the Netherlands caring for 2500 individuals with ID and lasted from October to December 2004 with a case control design for identifying determinants for errors. The institution consists of both day care units and living units (providing full-time care), located in different towns. For the study, five units from different towns were selected. Within each study unit, the administration of drugs to patients was observed for 2 weeks. In total, 953 drug administrations to 46 patients (25 male, mean age 25.8 years, range 2-73 years) were observed.

RESULTS

With inclusion of wrong time errors, 242 administrations with at least one error were observed [frequency=242/953 (25.4%)] and with exclusion 213 administrations with at least one error were observed [frequency=213/953 (22.4%)]. Determinants associated with errors were routes of administration 'oral by feeding tube' (OR 189.66; 95% CI 46.16-779.24) and 'inhalation' (OR 9.98; 95% CI 4.78-20.80), the units 'adult full-time care' (OR 2.12; 95% CI 1.05-4.35) and 'children daytime care' (OR 10.80; 95% CI 4.43-26.29) and the absence of a distribution robot (OR 4.0; 95% CI 2.67-5.95). None of the identified errors were reported to the voluntary reporting system.

CONCLUSION

This study shows that administration errors in an institution for individuals with ID are common and that they are not formally reported to the voluntary reporting system. Furthermore, it identified some determinants that may be the focus for future improvements aimed to reduce error frequency.

Electronic prescribing systems in pediatrics: the rationale and functionality requirements

This technical report discusses electronic prescribing systems and their limitations and potential benefits, particularly to the pediatrician in the ambulatory setting. In the report we acknowledge the benefits of integrating these systems with electronic health records and practice-management systems and recommend that the adoption of electronic prescribing systems be done in the context of ultimately moving toward an electronic health record. This technical report supports the accompanying American Academy of Pediatrics policy-statement recommendations on the adoption of electronic prescribing systems by pediatricians.

Medication errors in intravenous drug preparation and administration: a multicentre audit in the UK, Germany and France

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have identified medication errors in preparing and administering intravenous medicines of 13-84% in hospitals in individual countries.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of the design and implementation of systems for the preparation and administration of intravenous therapy in hospitals in three European countries on the number of observed medication errors. To gain a better understanding of these risks and the methods used in each country to manage them.

DESIGN

Prospective audit.

SETTING

Six hospital departments in the UK, Germany and France willing to participate in the audit as part of a quality improvement programme.

METHODS

Direct observation of the preparation and the administration of intravenous drugs made by a single observer in each country.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Medication process errors.

RESULTS

824 doses were prepared and 798 doses administered. The product was either not labelled or incorrectly labelled in 43%, 99%, and 20% of doses administered in the UK, German and French hospitals, respectively. The wrong diluent was used in 1%, 49% and 18% of cases, respectively, and the wrong rate of administration was selected for 49%, 21% and 5% of doses observed, respectively. At least one deviation from aseptic technique was observed among 100%, 58%, and 19% of cases in the three countries.

CONCLUSION

Uncontrolled risks in the intravenous systems studied were observed in all three countries. Intravenous therapy must be regarded as a high risk activity where the use of risk management procedures to minimise risk to patients is seen as a high priority by all those involved with these duties. There is a requirement to develop better national (possibly international) procedures for safe intravenous practice.

Assessment of adverse drug events among patients in a tertiary care medical center

PURPOSE

Specific patient and clinical characteristics associated with an increased risk of sustaining an adverse event (AE) were identified.

METHODS

AE reports for patients in a 658-bed tertiary care medical center between January 1, 2000, and June 30, 2002, were analyzed. The data collected from each report included medical record number, patient sex, patient age, clinical service, date of occurrence, diagnoses, type of error, suspected medication, and severity of the AE. A three-stage logistic regression model with high-risk indicators was used to evaluate key indicators of the most vulnerable patient populations.

RESULTS

The number of control patients and those with AEs totaled 60,206. This population was then randomly split into two equal groups of patients: the training data set (n = 30,103) and the validation data set (n = 30,103). AEs occurred in a higher percentage of patients who were age <1 year, 1-15, 47-59, and > or =60 years than in other groups. A higher percentage of AEs were reported in men than women, but the groups were not significantly different when comparing those with an AE and those without an AE. Asian Indian patients demonstrated a high rate of AEs, but this may be a statistical artifact, reflecting their very small percentage in the study. Evaluation of admission sources revealed that doctors' offices, clinic referrals, and local hospital transfers accounted for higher rates of AEs than other sources.

CONCLUSION

Certain age groups, diagnoses, admission sources, types of insurance, and the use of specific medications or medication classes were associated with increased AE rates at a tertiary care medical center.

[Adverse events in Intensive Medicine. Managing risk]

Health care interventions entail a risk of adverse events (AE), that may cause lesions, incapacities and even death in the patients. Given the complexity of the care of the critical patient, the Critical Care Services are a high risk setting for the appearance of AE in these patients, many of them avoidable. Several studies show the influence of organizational factors focused on the system in the reduction of care risk and on the result of the critical patients. The voluntary and anonymous registry and reporting systems make it possible to identify a significant percentage of these incidents, analyze the factors related (that contribute or limit), establish preventive strategies, permitting management of risk, and potentially reduce the appearance and consequences of avoidable AE with all this. Initiatives such as the ICU Safety Reporting System (ICUSRS), that use a web database as registry system and includes contributions from different sites, favor the safety and risk culture, essential in the improvement of health quality of critical patients.

The attitudes and beliefs of healthcare professionals on the causes and reporting of medication errors in a UK Intensive care unit

Our aim was to explore the attitudes and beliefs of healthcare professionals relating to the causes and reporting of medication errors in a UK intensive care unit. Medication errors were identified by the unit pharmacist and semi-structured qualitative interviews conducted with 13 members of staff involved with 12 errors. Interviews were analysed using a model of human error theory. Staff identified many contributing factors, including poor communication and frequent interruptions. Organisational factors included lack of clarity on the responsibility of the second nurse's check for medication administration, lack of feedback on medication errors, and a common and accepted practice of administering medication without a complete medication order. Barriers to reporting included administrative paperwork and lack of encouragement by management. Greater feedback on medication errors seems essential to improve current practice and increase reporting.

Drug-Related Problems in Hospitals

Problems associated with pharmacotherapy (in particular, medication errors and adverse drug events) are frequent and are associated with increased costs for treatment. Analysis of original publications published between 1990 and 2005 on the topics of medication errors and/or adverse drug events in hospitalised patients, focusing on the frequency of, risk factors for and avoidance of such problems associated with pharmacotherapy, indicated that medication errors occurred in a mean of 5.7% of all episodes of drug administration, but with a high variability among the 35 studies retrieved. This variability was explained by the methods by which medication errors were detected (systematic screening of patients versus chart review or spontaneous reporting) and by the way drugs were administered (intravenously administered drugs are associated with the highest error frequencies). Errors occurred throughout the whole medication process, with administration errors accounting for more than half of all errors. Important risk factors included insufficient pharmacological knowledge of health professionals, errors in the patient charts or documentation by nurses and inadequate pharmacy services.Adverse events or reactions, on the other hand, affected 6.1 patients per 100 hospitalised and also showed a high variability among the 46 studies retrieved. This variability could also be explained by the different methods of assessment of the frequency of adverse drug events or reactions, as well as by the different wards on which the studies were performed. Important risk factors for adverse drug events or reactions included polypharmacy, female sex, drugs with a narrow therapeutic range, renal elimination of drugs, age >65 years and use of anticoagulants or diuretics. Since medication errors are strong risk factors for preventable adverse drug events or reactions, strategies have to be put in place for their reduction. Such strategies include ensuring that all persons involved in the medication process (nurses, pharmacists and physicians) have good pharmacological knowledge, computerisation of the entire medication process, and the engagement of a sufficient number of clinical pharmacists on the wards.

Impact of computerized physician order entry on medication prescription errors in the intensive care unit: a controlled cross-sectional trial

Introduction

Medication errors in the intensive care unit (ICU) are frequent and lead to attributable patient morbidity and mortality, increased length of ICU stay and substantial extra costs. We investigated if the introduction of a computerized ICU system (Centricity Critical Care Clinisoft, GE Healthcare) reduced the incidence and severity of medication prescription errors (MPEs).

Methods

A prospective trial was conducted in a paper-based unit (PB-U) versus a computerized unit (C-U) in a 22-bed ICU of a tertiary university hospital. Every medication order and medication prescription error was validated by a clinical pharmacist. The registration of different classes of MPE was done according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention guidelines. An independent panel evaluated the severity of MPEs. We identified three groups: minor MPEs (no potential to cause harm); intercepted MPEs (potential to cause harm but intercepted on time); and serious MPEs (non-intercepted potential adverse drug events (ADE) or ADEs, being MPEs with potential to cause, or actually causing, patient harm).

Results

The C-U and the PB-U each contained 80 patient-days, and a total of 2,510 medication prescriptions were evaluated. The clinical pharmacist identified 375 MPEs. The incidence of MPEs was significantly lower in the C-U compared with the PB-U (44/1286 (3.4%) versus 331/1224 (27.0%); P < 0.001). There were significantly less minor MPEs in the C-U than in the PB-U (9 versus 225; P < 0.001). Intercepted MPEs were also lower in the C-U (12 versus 46; P < 0.001), as well as the non-intercepted potential ADEs (21 versus 48; P < 0.001). There was also a reduction of ADEs (2 in the C-U versus 12 in the PB-U; P < 0.01). No fatal errors occurred. The most frequent drug classes involved were cardiovascular medication and antibiotics in both groups. Patients with renal failure experienced less dosing errors in the C-U versus the PB-U (12 versus 35 serious MPEs; P < 0.001).

Conclusion

The ICU computerization, including the medication order entry, resulted in a significant decrease in the occurrence and severity of medication errors in the ICU.

Patient safety in intensive care: results from the multinational Sentinel Events Evaluation (SEE) study

OBJECTIVE

To assess on a multinational level the prevalence and corresponding factors of selected unintended events that compromise patient safety (sentinel events) in intensive care units (ICUs).

DESIGN

An observational, 24-h cross-sectional study of incidents in five representative categories.

SETTING

205 ICUs worldwide

MEASUREMENTS

Events were reported by intensive care unit staff members with the use of a structured questionnaire. Both ICU- and patient-related factors were assessed.

RESULTS

In 1,913 adult patients a total of 584 events affecting 391 patients were reported. During 24 h multiple errors related to medication occurred in 136 patients; unplanned dislodgement or inappropriate disconnection of lines, catheters, and drains in 158; equipment failure in 112; loss, obstruction or leakage of artificial airway in 47; and inappropriate turn-off of alarms in 17. Per 100 patient days, 38.8 (95% confidence interval 34.7-42.9) events were observed. In a multiple logistic regression with ICU as a random component, the following were associated with elevated odds for experiencing a sentinel event: any organ failure (odds ratio 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.00-1.28), a higher intensity in level of care (odds ratio 1.62, 95% confidence interval 1.18-2.22), and time of exposure (odds ratio 1.06, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.08).

CONCLUSIONS

Sentinel events related to medication, indwelling lines, airway, and equipment failure in ICUs occur with considerable frequency. Although patient safety is recognised as a serious issue in many ICUs, there is an urgent need for development and implementation of strategies for prevention and early detection of errors.