Computerized Physician Order Entry in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Narrative Review

Evaluation of the impact of pharmaceutical trainings and tools on the proper use of medicines in pediatrics

Introduction: After six years of medication errors' (MEs) collection and analysis in a pediatric unit of a French University Hospital, the number of MEs was no longer decreasing. We then decided to set up pharmaceutical training and tools and evaluate their impact on the occurrence of ME. Materials and methods: This monocentric prospective study was carried out in the form of audits of prescriptions, preparations, and administrations before and after intervention (A1 and A2). After the analysis of A1 results, feedback was given to the teams, some tools for the proper use of medication (PUM) were distributed, and A2 was conducted. Finally, A1 and A2 results were compared. Results: Each audit included 202 observations. A total of 120 MEs were identified during A1 and 54 for A2 (p < 0.0001). The observation rate with at least 1 ME decreased from 39.11% to 21.29% (p < 0.0001), and no observation had more than two MEs during A2 in contrast to A1 (n = 12). Human factors were responsible for the majority of MEs. The audit feedback allowed professionals to feel concerned about ME. The PUM tools received an average satisfaction rating of 9/10. The staff had never participated in this type of training, and all felt it was useful to apply PUM. Conclusion: This study showed a significant impact of pharmaceutical training and tools on the pediatric PUM. Clinical pharmaceutic actions allowed us to reach our objectives and satisfied all the staff. They must, therefore, be continued to limit human factors' impact and thus contribute to the safety of drug management in pediatrics.

Clinical decision support in the neonatal ICU

Clinical Decision Support (CDS) tools help the healthcare team diagnose, monitor, and treat patients more efficiently and consistently by executing clinical practice guidelines and recommendations. As a result, CDS has a direct impact on the delivery and healthcare outcomes. This review covers the fundamental concepts, as well as the infrastructure needed to create a CDS tool and examples of its use in the neonatal setting. This article also serves as a primer on what to think about when proposing the development of a new CDS tool, or when upgrading an existing one. We also highlight important elements that influence CDS development, such as informatics methodologies, data and device interoperability, and regulation.

Medication errors in neonatal intensive care units: a multicenter qualitative study in the Palestinian practice

Background

Neonatal intensive care units are high-risk settings where medication errors can occur and cause harm to this fragile segment of patients. This multicenter qualitative study was conducted to describe medication errors that occurred in neonatal intensive care units in Palestine from the perspectives of healthcare providers.

Methods

This exploratory multicenter qualitative study was conducted and reported in adherence to the consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research checklist. Semi-structured in-depth interviews were conducted with healthcare professionals (4 pediatricians/neonatologists and 11 intensive care unit nurses) who provided care services for patients admitted to neonatal intensive care units in Palestine. An interview schedule guided the semi-structured in-depth interviews. The qualitative interpretive description approach was used to thematically analyze the data.

Results

The total duration of the interviews was 282 min. The healthcare providers described their experiences with 41 different medication errors. These medication errors were categorized under 3 categories and 10 subcategories. Errors that occurred while preparing/diluting/storing medications were related to calculations, using a wrong solvent/diluent, dilution errors, failure to adhere to guidelines while preparing the medication, failure to adhere to storage/packaging guidelines, and failure to adhere to labeling guidelines. Errors that occurred while prescribing/administering medications were related to inappropriate medication for the neonate, using a different administration technique from the one that was intended, and administering a different dose from the one that was intended. Errors that occurred after administering the medications were related to failure to adhere to monitoring guidelines.

Conclusion

In this multicenter study, pediatricians/neonatologists and neonatal intensive care unit nurses described medication errors occurring in intensive care units in Palestine. Medication errors occurred in different stages of the medication process: preparation/dilution/storage, prescription/administration, and monitoring. Further studies are still needed to quantify medication errors occurring in the neonatal intensive care units and investigate if the designed strategies could be effective in minimizing the medication errors.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-022-03379-y.

Impact of Computerized Provider Order Entry on Chemotherapy Medication Errors: A Systematic Review

Context: Chemotherapy errors are considered the second most common cause of fatal medication errors (ME). Currently, computerized provider order entry (CPOE) is increasingly used to prevent or decrease ME and improve the safety of the medication process. Objectives: This study was conducted to systematically review the impacts of CPOE on the incidence of chemotherapy ME, the severity of errors, and adverse drug events (ADEs) in cancer care units. Data Sources: The literature search was conducted, using 5 databases of PubMed, EMBASE, Scopus, Web of Science, and ScienceDirect between 2000 and 2020. Search terms included keywords and MESH terms related to CPOE, ME, chemotherapy, and cancer care unit. Study Selection: Articles were included in this research if they investigated the CPOE system, reported ME, and were carried out in the oncology department. Non-English papers, duplications, review studies, and conference papers were excluded. Data Extraction: The selected papers were read repeatedly and related papers were extracted. All eligible articles were qualitatively evaluated with a tool provided by Downs. The extracted information included the author’s name, year of publication, study location, type of study, study objectives, and main findings. Results: A total of 829 studies were retrieved. Fourteen articles met the inclusion criteria. Ten studies (71%) reported the impact of CPOE on chemotherapy ME in comparison with the paper-based ordering method. In 4 studies (29%), researchers developed a CPOE for the oncology department, and the system was, then, assessed concerning user experience, safety challenges as well as the effects of CPOE on ME. Nine articles (64%) reported the impact of the CPOE system on ME only in the prescribing phase, and 5 studies (36%) examined ME in all phases of the chemotherapy process. Five studies (36%) reported the impact of the CPOE system on ADEs and the severity of errors. Conclusions: Implementing CPOE is associated with a significant reduction in ME in all phases of the chemotherapy process. However, the CPOE does not prevent all MEs and may cause new errors. The rigorous analysis of the chemotherapy process and considering the designing principles could help develop the CPOE systems and minimize ME.

Medication Errors in Pediatrics: Proposals to Improve the Quality and Safety of Care Through Clinical Risk Management

Medication errors represent one of the most common causes of adverse events in pediatrics and are widely reported in the literature. Despite the awareness that children are at increased risk for medication errors, little is known about the real incidence of the phenomenon. Most studies have focused on prescription, although medication errors also include transcription, dispensing, dosage, administration, and certification errors. Known risk factors for therapeutic errors include parenteral infusions, oral fluid administration, and tablet splitting, as well as the off-label use of drugs with dosages taken from adult literature. Emergency Departments and Intensive Care Units constitute the care areas mainly affected by the phenomenon in the hospital setting. The present paper aims to identify the risk profiles in pediatric therapy to outline adequate preventive strategies. Precisely, through the analysis of the available evidence, solutions such as standardization of recommended doses for children, electronic prescribing, targeted training of healthcare professionals, and implementation of reporting systems will be indicated for the prevention of medication errors.

Interventions to Reduce Pediatric Prescribing Errors in Professional Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review of the Last Decade

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric medication therapy is prone to errors due to the need for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic individualization and the diverse settings in which pediatric patients are treated. Prescribing errors have been reported as the most common medication error.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to systematically identify interventions to reduce prescribing errors and corresponding patient harm in pediatric healthcare settings and to evaluate their impact.

METHODS

Four databases were systematically screened (time range November 2011 to December 2019), and experimental studies were included. Interventions to reduce prescribing errors were extracted and classified according to a 'hierarchy of controls' model.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were included, and 70 individual interventions were identified. A bundle of interventions was more likely to reduce prescribing errors than a single intervention. Interventions classified as 'substitution or engineering controls' were more likely to reduce errors in comparison with 'administrative controls', as is expected from the hierarchy of controls model. Fourteen interventions were classified as substitution or engineering controls, including computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support (CDS) systems. Administrative controls, including education, expert consultations, and guidelines, were more commonly identified than higher level controls, although they may be less likely to reduce errors. Of the administrative controls, expert consultations were most likely to reduce errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to reduce pediatric prescribing errors are more likely to be successful when implemented as part of a bundle of interventions. Interventions including CPOE and CDS that substitute risks or provide engineering controls should be prioritized and implemented with appropriate administrative controls including expert consultation.

Interventions to Reduce Medication Dispensing, Administration, and Monitoring Errors in Pediatric Professional Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Pediatric patients cared for in professional healthcare settings are at high risk of medication errors. Interventions to improve patient safety often focus on prescribing; however, the subsequent stages in the medication use process (dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring) are also error-prone. This systematic review aims to identify and analyze interventions to reduce dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors in professional pediatric healthcare settings. Methods: Four databases were searched for experimental studies with separate control and intervention groups, published in English between 2011 and 2019. Interventions were classified for the first time in pediatric medication safety according to the "hierarchy of controls" model, which predicts that interventions at higher levels are more likely to bring about change. Higher-level interventions aim to reduce risks through elimination, substitution, or engineering controls. Examples of these include the introduction of smart pumps instead of standard pumps (a substitution control) and the introduction of mandatory barcode scanning for drug administration (an engineering control). Administrative controls such as guidelines, warning signs, and educational approaches are lower on the hierarchy and therefore predicted by this model to be less likely to be successful. Results: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1 study of dispensing errors, 7 studies of drug administration errors, and 12 studies targeting multiple steps of the medication use process. A total of 44 interventions were identified. Eleven of these were considered higher-level controls (four substitution and seven engineering controls). The majority of interventions (n = 33) were considered "administrative controls" indicating a potential reliance on these measures. Studies that implemented higher-level controls were observed to be more likely to reduce errors, confirming that the hierarchy of controls model may be useful in this setting. Heterogeneous study methods, definitions, and outcome measures meant that a meta-analysis was not appropriate. Conclusions: When designing interventions to reduce pediatric dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors, the hierarchy of controls model should be considered, with a focus placed on the introduction of higher-level controls, which may be more likely to reduce errors than the administrative controls often seen in practice. Trial Registration Prospero Identifier: CRD42016047127.

Effect of an Alternative Newborn Naming Strategy on Wrong-Patient Errors: A Quasi-Experimental Study

OBJECTIVES

Newborns are often assigned temporary names at birth. Temporary newborn names-often a combination of the mother's last name and the newborn's gender-are vulnerable to patient misidentification due to similarities with other newborns or between a mother and her newborn. We developed and implemented an alternative distinct naming strategy, and then compared its effectiveness on reducing the number of wrong-patient orders with the standard distinct naming strategy.

METHODS

This study was conducted over a 14-month period in the newborn nursery and neonatal intensive care units of three hospitals that were part of the same health care system. We used a quasi-experimental study design using interrupted time series analysis to compare the differences in wrong-patient orders (an indicator of patient misidentification) before and after the implementation of the alternative distinct naming strategy.

RESULTS

Overall, there were 25 wrong-patient errors per 10,000 orders during entire study period (36.8 per 10,000 before and 19.6 per 10,000 after). However, there was no statistically significant change in the rate of wrong-patient ordering errors after the transition from the distinct to the alternative distinct naming strategy (β = 0.832, 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.83 to 2.49, p = 0.326). We also found that, overall, 1.7% of the clinicians contributed to 62% of the wrong-patient errors.

CONCLUSION

Although we did not find statistically significant differences in wrong-patient errors, the alternative distinct naming approach provides pragmatic advantages over its predecessors. In addition, the localization of wrong-patient errors within a small set of clinicians highlights the potential for developing strategies for delivering training to clinicians.