Exploring behavioural determinants relating to health professional reporting of medication errors: a qualitative study using the Theoretical Domains Framework

Identifying factors influencing clinicians' reporting of medication errors: a systematic review and qualitative evidence synthesis using the theoretical domains framework

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors have a significant impact on patient safety and professional practice. The widespread under-reporting of errors by clinicians indicates the critical need for behavioral change. This systematic review aimed to identify and synthesize qualitative evidence on factors influencing clinicians' reporting of medication errors.

AREAS COVERED

Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Scopus, PubMed, and Embase were searched until March 2023 for studies on factors influencing clinicians' reporting of medication errors. Two independent reviewers conducted the screening, data extraction, and quality appraisal. Using framework synthesis approach, the identified themes were mapped to Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF).

EXPERT OPINION

The review analyzed fourteen high-quality studies across various regions. Facilitators of reporting were identified in the TDF domains of beliefs about consequences knowledge and social/professional role and identity. More themes emerged as barriers, mapped to the domains of beliefs about consequences, emotions, environmental context and resources and knowledge. The review suggests aligning these barriers with key behavior change techniques, such as emphasizing the risks of non-reporting, promoting emotional well-being, improving accessibility of reporting systems and advancing knowledge through educational programs. Future work should focus on developing these behavior change techniques into practical interventions.

Barriers and enablers for safe medication administration in adult and neonatal intensive care units mapped to the behaviour change wheel

BACKGROUND

Intensive care settings have high rates of medication administration errors. Medications are often administered by nurses and midwives using a specified process (the '5 rights'). Understanding where medication errors occur, the contributing factors and how best practice is delivered may assist in developing interventions to improve medication safety.

AIMS

To identify medication administration errors and context specific barriers and enablers for best practice in an adult and a neonatal intensive care unit. Secondary aims were to identify intervention functions (through the Behaviour Change Wheel).

STUDY DESIGN

A dual methods exploratory descriptive study was conducted (May to June 2021) in a mixed 56-bedded adult intensive care unit and a 6-bedded neonatal intensive care unit in Sydney, Australia. Incident monitoring data were examined. Direct semi-covert observational medication administration audits using the 5 rights (n = 39) were conducted. Brief interviews with patients, parents and nurses were conducted. Data were mapped to the Behaviour Change Wheel.

RESULTS

No medication administration incidents were recorded. Audits (n = 3) for the neonatal intensive care unit revealed no areas for improvement. Adult intensive care unit nurses (n = 36) performed checks for the right medication 35 times (97%) and patient identity 25 times (69%). Sixteen administrations (44%) were interrupted. Four themes were synthesized from the interview data: Trust in the nursing profession; Availability of policies and procedures; Adherence to the '5 rights' and departmental culture; and Adequate staffing. The interventional functions most likely to bring about behaviour change were environmental restructuring, enablement, restrictions, education, persuasion and modelling.

CONCLUSIONS

This study reveals insights about the medication administration practices of nurses in intensive care. Although there were areas for improvement there was widespread awareness among nurses regarding their responsibilities to safely administer medications. Interview data indicated high levels of trust among patients and parents in the nurses.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

This novel study indicated that nurses in intensive care are aware of their responsibilities to safely administer medications. Mapping of contextual data to the Behaviour Change Wheel resulted in the identification of Intervention functions most likely to change medication administration practices in the adult intensive care setting that is environmental restructuring, enablement, restrictions, education, persuasion and modelling.

Nurses' experience of the incident reporting culture before and after implementing the Green Cross method: A quality improvement project

BACKGROUND

Adverse events are a leading cause of death worldwide, although many are considered preventable. Incident reporting is a prerequisite for preventing adverse events; however, underreporting is common. The Green Cross method is an alternative incident reporting process that includes a daily team meeting to discuss incidents and work on improvements.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this quality improvement project was to improve the culture of incident reporting by implementing the Green Cross method and to evaluate the improvement by describing nurses' experience with the culture of incident reporting.

METHODS

The project included a three-month implementation of the method in a postanesthesia care unit, which was evaluated by focus group interviews (n = 22 nurses) and analysed by qualitative content analysis.

FINDINGS

Four focus group interviews were conducted before implementation (n = 19 nurses) and four after implementation (n = 16 nurses). Before implementation, Theme 1, "Incident reporting with potential for improvement", was constructed, describing a culture wherein nurses expressed motivation to report incidents but barriers, such as finding the system complicated and experiencing emotional obstacles towards reporting, prevented them. After implementation, Theme 2, "Increased focus on transparency", was constructed, describing a culture wherein nurses perceived an increased rate of incident reporting but still encountered barriers, such as finding reporting uncomfortable and demanding, experiencing a threatened working environment, and still wanting visible improvement.

CONCLUSION

The nurses in the postanesthesia care unit experienced the Green Cross method as a useful patient safety initiative for improving the rate of incident reporting, but barriers to reporting still existed.

Differences between professionals' views on patient safety culture in long-term and acute care? A cross-sectional study

Purpose

This paper aims to assess how patient safety culture and incident reporting differs across different professional groups and between long-term and acute care. The Hospital Survey On Patient Safety Culture (HSPOSC) questionnaire was used to assess patient safety culture. Data from the organizations’ incident reporting system was also used to determine the number of reported patient safety incidents.

Design/methodology/approach

Patient safety culture is part of the organizational culture and is associated for example to rate of pressure ulcers, hospital-acquired infections and falls. Managers in health-care organizations have the important and challenging responsibility of promoting patient safety culture. Managers generally think that patient safety culture is better than it is.

Findings

Based on statistical analysis, acute care professionals’ views were significantly positive in 8 out of 12 composites. Managers assessed patient safety culture at a higher level than other professional groups. There were statistically significant differences (p = 0.021) in frequency of events reported between professional groups and between long-term and acute care (p = 0.050). Staff felt they did not get enough feedback about reported incidents.

Originality/value

The study reveals differences in safety culture between acute care and long-term care settings, and between professionals and managers. The staff felt that they did not get enough feedback about reported incidents. In the future, education should take these factors into consideration.

Common Barriers to Reporting Medical Errors

BACKGROUND

Medical errors are the third leading cause of death in the United States. Reporting of all medical errors is important to better understand the problem and to implement solutions based on root causes. Underreporting of medical errors is a common and a challenging obstacle in the fight for patient safety. The goal of this study is to review common barriers to reporting medical errors.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the literature by searching the MEDLINE and SCOPUS databases for studies on barriers to reporting medical errors. The preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses guideline was followed in selecting eligible studies.

RESULTS

Thirty studies were included in the final review, 8 of which were from the United States. The majority of the studies used self-administered questionnaires (75%) to collect data. Nurses were the most studied providers (87%), followed by physicians (27%). Fear of consequences is the most reported barrier (63%), followed by lack of feedback (27%) and work climate/culture (27%). Barriers to reporting were highly variable between different centers.

Factors affecting nursing error communication in intensive care units: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Error communication includes both reporting errors to superiors and disclosing their consequences to patients and their families. It significantly contributes to error prevention and safety improvement. Yet, some errors in intensive care units are not communicated.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present study was to explore factors affecting error communication in intensive care units.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

This qualitative study was conducted in 2019. Participants were 17 critical care nurses purposively recruited from the intensive care units of 2 public hospitals affiliated to Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran. Data were collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews and were analyzed through the conventional content analysis method proposed by Graneheim and Lundman.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The Ethics Committee of Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran approved the study (code: IR.IUMS. REC.1397.792). Participants were informed about the study aim and methods and were ensured of data confidentiality. They were free to withdraw from the study at will. Written informed consent was obtained from all of them.

FINDINGS

Factors affecting error communication in intensive care units fell into four main categories, namely the culture of error communication (subcategories were error communication organizational atmosphere, clarity of processes and guidelines, managerial support for nurses, and learning organization), the consequences of errors for nurses and nursing (subcategories were fear over being stigmatized as incompetent, fear over punishment, and fear over negative judgments about nursing), the consequences of errors for patients (subcategories were monitoring the effects of errors on patients and predicting the effects of errors on patients), and ethical and professional characteristics (subcategories were ethical characteristics and inter-professional relationships).

DISCUSSION

The results of this study show many factors affect error communication, some facilitate and some prohibit it. Organizational factors such as the culture of error communication and the consequences of error communication for the nurse and the patient, as well as individual and professional characteristics, including ethical characteristics and interprofessional relationship, influence this process.

CONCLUSION

Errors confront nurses with ethical challenges and make them assess error consequences and then, communicate or hide them based on the results of their assessments. Health authorities can promote nurses' error communication through creating a supportive environment for them, developing clear error communication processes and guidelines, and providing them with education about the principles of ethical practice.

Views and experiences of decision-makers on organisational safety culture and medication errors

BACKGROUND

In 2017, the World Health Organization published "Medication Without Harm, WHO Global Patient Safety Challenge," to reduce patient harm caused by unsafe medication use practices. While the five objectives emphasise the need to create a framework for action, engaging key stakeholders and others, most published research has focused on the perspectives of health professionals. The aim was to explore the views and experiences of decision-makers in Qatar on organisational safety culture, medication errors and error reporting.

METHOD

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare decision-makers (policy-makers, professional leaders and managers, lead educators and trainers) in Qatar. Participants were recruited via purposive and snowball sampling, continued to the point of data saturation. The interview schedule focused on: error causation and error prevention; engendering a safety culture; and initiatives to encourage error reporting. Interviews were digitally recorded, transcribed and independently analysed by two researchers using the Framework Approach.

RESULTS

From the 21 interviews conducted, key themes were the need to: promote trust within the organisation through articulating a fair blame culture; eliminate management, professional and cultural hierarchies; focus on team building, open communication and feedback; promote professional development; and scale-up successful initiatives. There was recognition that the current medication error reporting processes and systems were suboptimal, with suggested enhancements in themes of promoting a fair blame culture and open communication.

CONCLUSION

These positive and negative aspects of organisational culture can inform the development of theory-based interventions to promote patient safety. Central to these will be the further development and sustainment of a "fair" blame culture in Qatar and beyond.

Knowledge, perceived barriers and facilitators of medication error reporting: a quantitative survey in Malaysian primary care clinics

Background Medication errors are the most common types of medical errors that occur in health care organisations; however, these errors are largely underreported. Objective This study assessed knowledge on medication error reporting, perceived barriers to reporting medication errors, motivations for reporting medication errors and medication error reporting practices among various health care practitioners working at primary care clinics. Setting This study was conducted in 27 primary care clinics in Malaysia. Methods A self-administered survey was distributed to family medicine specialists, doctors, pharmacists, pharmacist assistants, nurses and assistant medical officers. Main outcome measures Health care practitioners' knowledge, perceived barriers and motivations for reporting medication errors. Results Of all respondents (N = 376), nurses represented 31.9% (n = 120), followed by doctors (n = 87, 23.1%), pharmacists (n = 63, 16.8%), assistant medical officers (n = 53, 14.1%), pharmacist assistants (n = 46, 12.2%) and family medicine specialists (n = 7, 1.9%). Of the survey respondents who had experience reporting medication errors, 56% (n = 62) had submitted medication error reports in the preceding 12 months. Results showed that 41.2% (n = 155) of respondents were classified as having good knowledge on medication error and medication error reporting. The mean score of knowledge was significantly higher among prescribers and pharmacists than nurses, pharmacist assistants and assistant medical officers (p < 0.05). A heavy workload was the key barrier for both nurses and assistant medical officers, while time constraints prevented pharmacists from reporting medication errors. Family medicine specialists were mainly unsure about the reporting process. On the other hand, doctors and pharmacist assistants did not report primarily because they were unaware medication errors had occurred. Both family medicine specialists and pharmacist assistants identified patient harm as a motivation to report an error. Doctors and nurses indicated that they would report if they thought reporting could improve the current practices. Assistant medical officers reported that anonymous reporting would encourage them to submit a report. Pharmacists would report if they have enough time to do so. Conclusion Policy makers should consider using the information on identified barriers and facilitators to reporting medication errors in this study to improve the reporting system to reduce under-reported medication errors in primary care.

The role of organizational and professional cultures in medication safety: a scoping review of the literature

PURPOSE

This scoping review explores what is known about the role of organizational and professional cultures in medication safety. The aim is to increase our understanding of 'cultures' within medication safety and provide an evidence base to shape governance arrangements.

DATA SOURCES

Databases searched are ASSIA, CINAHL, EMBASE, HMIC, IPA, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and SCOPUS.

STUDY SELECTION

Inclusion criteria were original research and grey literature articles written in English and reporting the role of culture in medication safety on either organizational or professional levels, with a focus on nursing, medical and pharmacy professions. Articles were excluded if they did not conceptualize what was meant by 'culture' or its impact was not discussed.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data were extracted for the following characteristics: author(s), title, location, methods, medication safety focus, professional group and role of culture in medication safety.

RESULTS OF DATA SYNTHESIS

A total of 1272 citations were reviewed, of which, 42 full-text articles were included in the synthesis. Four key themes were identified which influenced medication safety: professional identity, fear of litigation and punishment, hierarchy and pressure to conform to established culture. At times, the term 'culture' was used in a non-specific and arbitrary way, for example, as a metaphor for improving medication safety, but with little focus on what this meant in practice.

CONCLUSIONS

Organizational and professional cultures influence aspects of medication safety. Understanding the role these cultures play can help shape both local governance arrangements and the development of interventions which take into account the impact of these aspects of culture.

Communication interventions in adult and pediatric oncology: A scoping review and analysis of behavioral targets

BACKGROUND

Improving communication requires that clinicians and patients change their behaviors. Interventions might be more successful if they incorporate principles from behavioral change theories. We aimed to determine which behavioral domains are targeted by communication interventions in oncology.

METHODS

Systematic search of literature indexed in Ovid Medline, Embase, Scopus, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Clinicaltrials.gov (2000-October 2018) for intervention studies targeting communication behaviors of clinicians and/or patients in oncology. Two authors extracted the following information: population, number of participants, country, number of sites, intervention target, type and context, study design. All included studies were coded based on which behavioral domains were targeted, as defined by Theoretical Domains Framework.

FINDINGS

Eighty-eight studies met inclusion criteria. Interventions varied widely in which behavioral domains were engaged. Knowledge and skills were engaged most frequently (85%, 75/88 and 73%, 64/88, respectively). Fewer than 5% of studies engaged social influences (3%, 3/88) or environmental context/resources (5%, 4/88). No studies engaged reinforcement. Overall, 7/12 behavioral domains were engaged by fewer than 30% of included studies. We identified methodological concerns in many studies. These 88 studies reported 188 different outcome measures, of which 156 measures were reported by individual studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Most communication interventions target few behavioral domains. Increased engagement of behavioral domains in future studies could support communication needs in feasible, specific, and sustainable ways. This study is limited by only including interventions that directly facilitated communication interactions, which excluded stand-alone educational interventions and decision-aids. Also, we applied stringent coding criteria to allow for reproducible, consistent coding, potentially leading to underrepresentation of behavioral domains.

Problems with incident reporting: Reports lead rarely to recommendations

AIM AND OBJECTIVE

To analyse trends in incident reporting over the last 5 years and determine how many reports led to recommendations?

BACKGROUND

Patient safety incident reporting systems have been used in health care for years. However, they have a significant weakness in that reports often do not lead to any visible action.

DESIGN

The study is a retrospective register study. STROBE checklist was applied in the preparation of the paper.

METHODS

Data were collected from a web-based incident reporting database (HaiPro) for a social- and healthcare organisation in Finland, covering the period from 2011-2015.

RESULTS

In total, 16,019 incident reports were analysed. In 2.7% (n = 426) of all reports, there was written recommendation to develop action that such incidents would not happen again. Those reports were classified into seven categories: education, introduction and information, introduction to work, patient care, guidelines, instruments and IT programmes, and the physical environment.

CONCLUSIONS

Managers get major amount incident reports. There should be (a) a definition what kind of events should be reported, (b) a definition for how serious events managers have to make a recommendation and (c) control that recommendations are implemented.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

There is a need for more action to promote patient safety based on incident reports.

Exploring facilitators and barriers to medication error reporting among healthcare professionals in Qatar using the theoretical domains framework: A mixed-methods approach

Background

There is a need for theory informed interventions to optimise medication reporting. This study aimed to quantify and explain behavioural determinants relating to error reporting of healthcare professionals in Qatar as a basis of developing interventions to optimise the effectiveness and efficiency of error reporting.

Methods

A sequential explanatory mixed methods design comprising a cross-sectional survey followed by focus groups in Hamad Medical Corporation, Qatar. All doctors, nurses and pharmacists were invited to complete a questionnaire that included items of behavioural determinants derived from the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), an integrative framework of 33 theories of behaviour change. Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to identify components, with total component scores computed. Differences in total scores among demographic groupings were tested using Mann-Whitney U test (2 groups) or Kruskal-Wallis (>2 groups). Respondents expressing interest in focus group participation were sampled purposively, and discussions based on survey findings using the TDF to provide further insight to survey findings. Ethical approval was received from Hamad Medical Corporation, Robert Gordon University, and Qatar University.

Results

One thousand, six hundred and four questionnaires were received (67.9% nurses, 13.3% doctors, 12.9% pharmacists). Questionnaire items clustered into six components of: knowledge and skills related to error reporting; feedback and support; action and impact; motivation; effort; and emotions. There were statistically significant higher scores in relation to age (older more positive, p<0.001), experience as a healthcare professional (more experienced most positive apart from those with the highest level of experience, p<0.001), and profession (pharmacists most positive, p<0.05). Fifty-four healthcare professionals from different disciplines participated in the focus groups. Themes mapped to nine of fourteen TDF domains. In terms of emotions, the themes that emerged as barriers to error reporting were: fear and worry on submitting a report; that submitting was likely to lead to further investigation that could impact performance evaluation and career progression; concerns over the impact on working relationships; and the potential lack of confidentiality.

Conclusions

This study has quantified and explained key facilitators and barriers of medication error reporting. Barriers appeared to be largely centred on issues relating to emotions and related beliefs of consequences. Quantitative results demonstrated that while these were issues for all healthcare professionals, those younger and less experienced were most concerned. Qualitative findings highlighted particular concerns relating to these emotional aspects. These results can be used to develop theoretically informed interventions with the aims of improving the effectiveness and efficiency of the medication reporting systems impacting patient safety.

Student perceptions of faculty feedback following medication errors - A descriptive study

Nursing students make medication errors as they progress through educational programs. It is important that faculty feedback is such that students feel comfortable reporting subsequent medication errors. The objectives of this study are to determine factors which increase the likelihood of nursing students reporting medication errors; to elicit nursing student perception of faculty feedback following a medication error, and determine how this faculty feedback impacts reporting of subsequent medication errors; and to develop recommendations regarding the most effective faculty approaches when providing feedback to nursing students following medication errors. This quantitative study uses a non-experimental, descriptive design. A convenience sample of 106 nursing students in one Canadian province completed a self-report questionnaire. The factors identified as increasing the likelihood of reporting medication errors for students who made a medication error were the same as for those who did not make an error. Group sizes were too small to determine if characteristics of faculty feedback had a significant impact on likelihood of reporting future errors. Students in both groups indicated intention to report errors based upon professional attitudes, behaviors and/or values. The researchers concluded that professional socialization, in combination with supportive learning environments, may increase student comfort in reporting medication errors.

Medication Error Reporting: Underreporting and Acceptability of Smartphone Application for Reporting among Health Care Professionals in Perak, Malaysia

Background and objectives In Malaysia, the national voluntary non-punitive Medication Error Reporting System (MER-S) has been available since 2009, with compiled reports indicating the underreporting of various medication errors (ME). This survey intends to determine the ME reporting practice among healthcare professionals and the acceptance of ME reporting by utilising smartphone application if it is available. Design A cross-sectional survey was conducted for two months in 2017 among doctors and pharmacists in publicly funded healthcare facilities in Perak, Malaysia. The survey was distributed through various professional WhatsApp chat groups, and reminders were sent twice to the respondents. Results A total of 334 doctors and pharmacists responded to the survey; the majority were pharmacists (61.7%) with a median age (in years) of 32 (interquartile range (IQR) 29-36) and work experience (in years) of 7.5 years (IQR 5-11). The rate of respondents being aware of the MER-S and having encountered ME at the workplace was high, at 73.4% and 96.1%, respectively. However, only 44.8% reported using the system. The reason hindering them from reporting ME was primarily being in a busy and hectic work environment. Pharmacists were more likely to report ME compared to doctors (adjusted odds ratio (adj OR) 10.51; 95% Confidence interval (CI): 5.34, 20.6), especially pharmacists who had frequent encounters with ME at work (adj OR 2.84; 95% CI: 1.70, 4.81) and who perceived that ME can be handled well (adj OR 3.52; 95% CI: 1.93, 6.44). They were more likely to report ME. A majority (90.7%) had downloaded one or more digital medical applications to aid their work. The speed of Internet connectivity at the workplace was rated as "fast" or "good" among 136 (40.7%) respondents but among 130 (38.9%), it was "average." The percentage of doctors and pharmacists that would report ME by utilising a smartphone application was 86.5% if one is available, and they preferred an application with a user-friendly interface, anonymity, and limited data-entry requirements. Conclusion Doctors and pharmacists were aware of MER-S and willing to report when they encountered ME. However, less than half of the respondents had used the system. With the primary concern of ME underreporting in a busy and hectic work environment, an alternative smartphone ME reporting application can be developed to complement the current MER-S considering that the respondents had positive responses to this method.

Quantifying behavioural determinants relating to health professional reporting of medication errors: a cross-sectional survey using the Theoretical Domains Framework

PURPOSE

The aims of this study were to quantify the behavioural determinants of health professional reporting of medication errors in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and to explore any differences between respondents.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey of patient-facing doctors, nurses and pharmacists within three major hospitals of Abu Dhabi, the UAE. An online questionnaire was developed based on the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF, a framework of behaviour change theories). Principal component analysis (PCA) was used to identify components and internal reliability determined. Ethical approval was obtained from a UK university and all hospital ethics committees.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-four responses were received. Questionnaire items clustered into six components of knowledge and skills, feedback and support, action and impact, motivation, effort and emotions. Respondents generally gave positive responses for knowledge and skills, feedback and support and action and impact components. Responses were more neutral for the motivation and effort components. In terms of emotions, the component with the most negative scores, there were significant differences in terms of years registered as health professional (those registered longest most positive, p = 0.002) and age (older most positive, p < 0.001) with no differences for gender and health profession.

CONCLUSION

Emotional-related issues are the dominant barrier to reporting and are common to all professions. There is a need to develop, test and implement an intervention to impact health professionals' emotions. Such an intervention should focus on evidence-based behaviour change techniques of reducing negative emotions, focusing on emotional consequences and providing social support.

KEY MESSAGES

• This research used the Theoretical Domains Framework to quantify the behavioural determinants of health professional reporting of medication errors. • Questionnaire items relating to emotions surrounding reporting generated the most negative responses with significant differences in terms of years registered as health professional (those registered longest most positive) and age (older most positive) with no differences for gender and health profession. • Interventions based on behaviour change techniques mapped to emotions should be prioritised for development.