An observational study of medication administration errors in old-age psychiatric inpatients

EPERCAS study (Strategies for Preventing Medication Administration Errors in Nursing Homes). Preparation of a list of strategies to prevent the most frequent medication administration errors in the residential care environment

Medication administration errors are one of the most frequent types of errors. There are different safety guides and recommendations to prevent medication errors generally directed to the hospital environment. However, specific recommendations for the management process in the residential care environment are lacking. The main objective of this study was to develop a list of recommendations to aid in preventing the most important medication errors that occur during the administration process in nursing homes (NHs), such as not administering doses or administering medication to the wrong patient. The effectiveness and feasibility of the strategies proposed were evaluated by a panel of experts. The conventional Delphi method was applied. The first round in our study was a face-to-face questionnaire; the second round included an online questionnaire based on the results of the first round. Finally, eight strategies were included in the EPERCAS List: one professional in charge per shift; one professional commissioned by the residential unit; avoid interruptions; avoid medication outside of meal times; personalized medication drawer for each resident including oral medication from a bag and laxatives, inhalers, syrups, eye drops, etc.; identification of the resident and their medication; visual check that everything has been administered; and signature to verify medication administration. The great continual challenge for NH is to define safe and affordable procedures. Minimum safety recommendations for administering the medications, such as those included in this study, should be employed. Our next stage is to implement these strategies in one of our NH and subsequently, evaluate its effectiveness and consider expanding it to the rest of the NH.

Potential Risk Factors of Drug-Related Problems in Hospital-Based Mental Health Units: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Reducing the occurrence of drug-related problems is a global health concern. In mental health hospitals, drug-related problems are common, leading to patient harm, and therefore understanding their potential risk factors is key for guiding future interventions designed to minimise their frequency.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this systematic review was to explore the potential risk factors of drug-related problems in mental health inpatient units.

METHODS

Six databases were searched between 2000 and 2021 to identify studies that investigated the potential risk factors of drug-related problems in adults hospitalised in mental health inpatient units. Data extraction was performed by two authors independently and Allan and Barker's criteria were used for study quality assessment. Studies were categorised based on drug-related problem types and potential risk factors were stratified as patient, medication, and hospital related.

RESULTS

A total of 22 studies were included. Studies mostly originated in Europe (n = 19/22, 86.4%), and used a multivariable logistic regression to identify potential risk factors (n = 13, 59%). Frequently investigated factors were patient age (n = 14/22), sex (n = 14/22) and the number of prescribed medications (n = 14/22). Of these, increasing the number of prescribed medications was the only factor consistently reported to be significantly associated with the occurrence of most types of drug-related problems (n = 11/14).

CONCLUSIONS

A variety of patient, medication and hospital-related potential risk factors of drug-related problems in mental health inpatient units were identified. These factors could guide the development of interventions to reduce drug-related problems such as pharmaceutical screening tools to identify high-risk patients for timely interventions. Future studies could test a wider range of possible factors associated with drug-related problems using standardised approaches.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO: CRD42021279946.

Your clinical pharmacist can save your life, the impact of pharmacist's intervention

Objective

Patient safety and adverse event analysis are of paramount importance in the management of patient medication, given the significant economic burden they place on a country's healthcare system. Medication errors fall into the category of preventable adverse drug therapy events and are therefore of key importance from a patient safety perspective. Our study aims to identify the types of medication errors associated with the medication dispensing process and to determine whether automated individual medication dispensing with pharmacist intervention significantly reduces medication errors, thereby increasing patient safety, compared to traditional, ward base medication dispensing (by a nurse).

Method

A prospective, quantitative, double-blind point prevalence study was conducted in three inpatient internal medicine wards of Komló Hospital in February 2018 and 2020. We analyzed data from comparisons of prescribed and non-prescribed oral medications in 83 and 90 patients per year aged 18 years or older with different diagnoses treated for internal medicine on the same day and in the same ward. In the 2018 cohort, medication was traditionally dispensed by a ward nurse, while in the 2020 cohort, it used automated individual medication dispensing with pharmacist intervention. Transdermally administered, parenteral and patient-introduced preparations were excluded from our study.

Results

We identified the most common types of errors associated with drug dispensing. The overall error rate in the 2020 cohort was significantly lower (0.9%) than in the 2018 cohort (18.1%) (p < 0.05). Medication errors were observed in 51% of patients in the 2018 cohort, i.e. 42 patients, of which 23 had multiple errors simultaneously. In contrast, in the 2020 cohort, a medication error occurred in 2%, i.e. 2 patients (p < 0.05). When evaluating the potential clinical consequences of medication errors, in the 2018 cohort, the proportion of potentially significant errors was 76.2% and potentially serious errors 21.4%, whereas in the 2020 cohort, only three medication errors were identified in the potentially significant category due to pharmacist intervention, which was significantly lower (p < 0.05). Polypharmacy was detected in 42.2% of patients in the first study and in 12.2% (p < 0.05) in the second study.

Conclusion

Automated individual medication dispensing with pharmacist intervention is a suitable method to increase the safety of hospital medication, reduce medication errors, and thus improve patient safety.

Omissions and Deviations From Safe Drug Administration Guidelines in 2 Medical Wards and Risk Factors: Findings From an Observational Study

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to record the type and frequency of errors, with an emphasis on omissions, during administration of medicines to inpatients and to investigate associated factors.

METHODS

This was a descriptive observational study. The medication process in 2 medical wards was observed by 2 observers using a structured observation form. χ2 Test, Kruskal-Wallis test, and regression analysis were used to explore associations between factors and errors.

RESULTS

From the 665 administrations observed, a total of 2371 errors were detected from which 81.2% were omissions and 18.8% were errors of commission. Omissions in the infection prevention guidelines (46.6%) and in the 5 rights of medication safety principles (35.8%) were a predominant finding. In particular, omitting to hand wash before administering a drug (98.4%), omitting to disinfect the site of injection (37.7%), and omitting to confirm the patient's name (74.4%) were the 3 most frequently observed omissions. Documentation errors (13.1%) and administration method errors (4.5%) were also detected. Regression analysis has shown that the therapeutic class of the drug administered and the number of medicines taken per patient were the 2 factors with a statistical significance that increased the risk of a higher number of errors being detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Errors during drug administration are still common in clinical practice, with omissions being the most common type of error. In particular, omissions in the basic infection and safety regulations seem to be a very common problem. The risk of a higher number of errors being made is increased when a cardiovascular drug is administered and when the number of medicines administered per patient is increased.

Medication modification in a population of community-dwelling individuals aged 65 years or older

BACKGROUND

medication safety is a major public health challenge, particularly among older populations. Changing the medication's form may be inappropriate and may incur a risk of adverse effects.

OBJECTIVES

the objectives were to estimate the prevalence of medication modification and to identify factors associated with the practice of medication modification in community-dwelling older individuals.

DESIGN

observational, cross-sectional, single-centre and epidemiological study.

SETTINGS

community.

SUBJECTS

outpatients and/or their accompanying persons, aged 65 years or over.

METHODS

sociodemographic and clinical variables were recorded. It was also noted how the medication was taken, who administered the medications, the number of oral medications ingested per day, and whether or not the form of the medication was modified to facilitate administration. Descriptive analyses and logistic regression were performed.

RESULTS

a total of 252 individuals were included in the study, with a mean age of 83 ± 7 years. Of these, 44 (17.5%) reported modifying their medication, either routinely (n = 36) or occasionally (n = 8). The factors independently associated with medication modification were the existence of psycho-behavioural disorders [odds ratio (OR) = 3.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) = 1.84-7.76; P < 0.0001], mobility difficulties (OR = 2.16; 95% CI = 1.01-4.62; P = 0.04), and the presence of dysphagia (OR = 3.23; 95% CI = 1.49-6.99; P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

this study indicates that main caregivers are more likely to engage in medication modification than nurses or the patients themselves. Factors associated with medication modification include swallowing difficulties and psycho-behavioural disorders. These findings provide new avenues that could help to mitigate this practice.

Solid Oral Dosage Forms Use in Adults with Neurological Disorders and Swallowing Difficulties: A Scoping Review

Swallowing difficulties affects the deglutition of solid oral dosage forms (SODFs) and it is a common problem among neurological disorders. Interventions may improve the use of SODFs in healthcare settings. The aim of this study was to map the available research about the interventions aiming the effective and safe use of SODFs in adults with neurological disorders and swallowing difficulties and to identify potential literature gaps in this scientific field. A scoping review was carried out based on Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines and reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews, in PubMed, Scopus, and SciELO databases (March 2021). Peer-reviewed observational studies assessed the effectiveness and safety of SODFs in adults with neurological disorders and swallowing difficulties in the healthcare organizations setting were included. 11 studies were included (three case reports, two mixed-methods intervention studies, and six analytic studies). The frequency of women ranged from 49 to 67%, and the age from 57 to 91 years. Most studies (n = 7) included elderly patients, Parkinson (n = 6) and dementia (n = 3). Medication review was the most frequently reported intervention, 35% (9/26). In most studies, interventions were targeted to patients during hospitalization (n = 7) and performed by physicians (n = 8). At least 20 different outcomes were evaluated in the studies. Implementing specific protocols for using SODFs aimed at the swallowing difficulties of this population is not a common practice. Additional studies on interventions aimed at optimizing SODFs are needed to support the safety and efficacy of oral therapy in this patient group.

Role of the nurses in partnering with mothers to give oral medication to their hospitalised child: Modification and development of a contextualised evidence-based practice guideline

Background

In paediatric wards, children are often reluctant to receive medication from nurses and eventually it is given by the parents. It is a common practice for nurses to hand the medication to mothers to give to their children, However, it is an ‘informal’ practice and lacks evidence-based guidelines.

Objectives

To develop a contextualised and adapted evidence-based guideline to support nurses to partner with mothers/carers so that they can safely give oral medication to their hospitalised child under the supervision of a competent nurse.

Method

Existing relevant guidelines were identified through searches of bibliographic databases and websites. The AGREE II: Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation II instrument was used to appraise the quality of the identified sources. The process of guideline adaptation recommended by the South African Guidelines Excellence project was followed, and a list of adapted recommendations was developed, aligned with the legislative and regulatory frameworks for nursing in South Africa. Accessible end user documentation was developed.

Results

Six sources were screened and three sources were found to be eligible and were subjected to full appraisal. Two guidelines and one policy document were identified as suitable for adaptation. Expert consultation confirmed that the resulting adapted guideline was sound, easy to understand, and well presented for the target audience.

Conclusion

This process successfully led to the development of a modified evidence-based practice guideline to enable nurses to partner with mothers/caregivers in safely giving oral medication to their hospitalised child in lower-resourced African settings.

Medication Safety in Mental Health Hospitals: A Mixed-Methods Analysis of Incidents Reported to the National Reporting and Learning System

BACKGROUND

Medication safety incidents commonly occur in mental health hospitals. There is a need to improve the understanding of the circumstances that are thought to have played a part in the origin of these incidents to design safer systems to improve patient safety.

AIM

This study aimed to undertake a mixed-methods analysis of medication safety incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System in England and Wales in 2010 to 2017.

METHOD

Quantitative analyses of anonymized medication safety incidents occurring in mental health hospitals that were reported to the National Reporting and Learning System during an 8-year period were undertaken to characterize their type, severity, and the medication(s) involved. Second, a content analysis of the free-text reports associated with all incidents of at least moderate harm severity was undertaken to identify the underlying contributory factors.

RESULTS

Overall, 94,134 medication incident reports were examined, of which 10.4% (n = 9811) were reported to have resulted in harm. The 3 most frequent types of reported medication incidents involved omission of medication (17,302; 18.3%), wrong frequency (11,882; 12.6%), and wrong/unclear dose of medication (10,272; 10.9%). Medicines from the central nervous system (42,609; 71.0%), cardiovascular (4537; 7.6%), and endocrine (3669; 6.1%) medication classes were the most frequently involved with incidents. Failure to follow protocols (n = 93), lack of continuity of care (n = 92), patient behaviors (n = 62), and lack of stock (n = 51) were frequently reported as contributory factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication incidents pose an enduring threat to patient safety in mental health hospitals. This study has identified important targets that can guide the tailored development of remedial interventions.

Economic analysis of the prevalence and clinical and economic burden of medication error in England

OBJECTIVES

To provide national estimates of the number and clinical and economic burden of medication errors in the National Health Service (NHS) in England.

METHODS

We used UK-based prevalence of medication errors (in prescribing, dispensing, administration and monitoring) in primary care, secondary care and care home settings, and associated healthcare resource use, to estimate annual number and burden of errors to the NHS. Burden (healthcare resource use and deaths) was estimated from harm associated with avoidable adverse drug events (ADEs).

RESULTS

We estimated that 237 million medication errors occur at some point in the medication process in England annually, 38.4% occurring in primary care; 72% have little/no potential for harm and 66 million are potentially clinically significant. Prescribing in primary care accounts for 34% of all potentially clinically significant errors. Definitely avoidable ADEs are estimated to cost the NHS £98 462 582 per year, consuming 181 626 bed-days, and causing/contributing to 1708 deaths. This comprises primary care ADEs leading to hospital admission (£83.7 million; causing 627 deaths), and secondary care ADEs leading to longer hospital stay (£14.8 million; causing or contributing to 1081 deaths).

CONCLUSIONS

Ubiquitous medicines use in health care leads unsurprisingly to high numbers of medication errors, although most are not clinically important. There is significant uncertainty around estimates due to the assumption that avoidable ADEs correspond to medication errors, data quality, and lack of data around longer-term impacts of errors. Data linkage between errors and patient outcomes is essential to progress understanding in this area.

Are medications safely used by residents in elderly care homes? - A multi-centre observational study from Sri Lanka

BACKGROUND

Most residents in elderly care homes in Sri Lanka do not receive formal, on-site, patient care services.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the appropriateness of prescribing, dispensing, administration, and storage practices of medication used by residents in selected elderly care homes in Colombo District, Sri Lanka.

METHODOLOGY

This was a prospective, cross-sectional, multi-center study of 100 residents with chronic, non-communicable diseases, who resided in nine selected elderly care homes in Sri Lanka. Medication histories were obtained from each resident/caregiver and the appropriateness of medications in their current prescription was reviewed using standard treatment guidelines. Prescriptions were cross-checked against respective dispensing labels to identify dispensing errors. Medication administration was directly observed on two separate occasions per resident for accuracy of administration, and matched against the relevant prescription instructions. Medication storage was also observed in terms of exposure to temperature and sunlight, the suitability of container, and adequacy of separation if using multiple medications.

RESULTS

The mean age of residents was 70±10.5 years and the majority were women (72%). A total of 168 errors out of 446 prescriptions were identified. The mean number of prescribing errors per resident was 1.68±1.23 [median, 2.00 (1.00-3.00)]. Inappropriate dosing frequencies were the highest (37.5%;63/168), followed by missing or inappropriate medications (31.5%;53/168). The mean number of dispensing errors per resident was 15.9±13.1 [median, 14.0 (6.00-22.75)] with 3.6 dispensing errors per every medication dispensed. Mean administration errors per resident was 0.95±1.5 [median, 0.00 (0.00-1.00)], with medication omissions being the predominant error (50.5%;48/95). Another lapse was incorrect storage of medications (143 storage errors), and included 83 medications not properly separated from each other (58.0%).

CONCLUSION

Multiple errors related to prescribing, dispensing, administration, and storage were identified amongst those using medication in elderly care homes. Services of a dedicated consultant pharmacist could improve the quality of medication use in elderly care homes in Sri Lanka.

Prevalence, nature and predictors of omitted medication doses in mental health hospitals: A multi-centre study

Objective

Limited evidence concerning the burden and predictors of omitted medication doses within mental health hospitals could severely limit improvement efforts in this specialist setting. This study aimed to determine the prevalence, nature and predictors of omitted medication doses affecting hospital inpatients in two English National Health Service (NHS) mental health trusts.

Methods

Over 6 data collection days trained pharmacy teams screened inpatient prescription charts for scheduled and omitted medication doses within 27 adult and elderly wards across 9 psychiatric hospitals. Data were collected for inpatients admitted up to two weeks prior to each data collection day. Omitted doses were classified as ‘time critical’ and ‘preventable’ based on established criteria. Omitted dose frequencies were presented with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Multilevel logistic regression analyses determined the predictors of omitted dose occurrence, with omission risks presented as adjusted odds ratios (OR) with 95% CI.

Results

18,664 scheduled medication doses were screened for 444 inpatients and 2,717 omissions were identified, resulting in a rate of 14.6% (95% CI 14.1–15.1). The rate of ‘time critical’ omitted doses was 19.3% (95% CI 16.3–22.6%). ‘Preventable’ omitted doses comprised one third of all omissions (34.5%, 930/2694). Logistic regression analysis revealed that medicines affecting the central nervous system were 55% less likely to be omitted compared to all other medication classes (9.9% vs. 18.8%, OR 0.45 (0.40–0.52)) and that scheduled doses administered using non-oral routes were more likely to be omitted compared the oral route (inhaled OR 3.47 (2.64–4.57), topical 2.71 (2.11–3.46), ‘other’ 2.15 (1.19–3.90)). ‘Preventable’ dose omissions were more than twice as likely to occur for ‘time critical’ medications than non-time critical medications (50.4% vs. 33.8%, OR 2.24 (1.22–4.11)).

Conclusions

Omitted medication doses occur commonly in mental health hospitals with ‘preventable’ omissions a key contributor to this burden. Important targets for remedial intervention have been identified.

Patient safety in inpatient mental health settings: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Patients in inpatient mental health settings face similar risks (eg, medication errors) to those in other areas of healthcare. In addition, some unsafe behaviours associated with serious mental health problems (eg, self-harm), and the measures taken to address these (eg, restraint), may result in further risks to patient safety. The objective of this review is to identify and synthesise the literature on patient safety within inpatient mental health settings using robust systematic methodology.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-synthesis. Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Health Management Information Consortium, MEDLINE, PsycINFO and Web of Science were systematically searched from 1999 to 2019. Search terms were related to 'mental health', 'patient safety', 'inpatient setting' and 'research'. Study quality was assessed using the Hawker checklist. Data were extracted and grouped based on study focus and outcome. Safety incidents were meta-analysed where possible using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Of the 57 637 article titles and abstracts, 364 met inclusion criteria. Included publications came from 31 countries and included data from over 150 000 participants. Study quality varied and statistical heterogeneity was high. Ten research categories were identified: interpersonal violence, coercive interventions, safety culture, harm to self, safety of the physical environment, medication safety, unauthorised leave, clinical decision making, falls and infection prevention and control.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient safety in inpatient mental health settings is under-researched in comparison to other non-mental health inpatient settings. Findings demonstrate that inpatient mental health settings pose unique challenges for patient safety, which require investment in research, policy development, and translation into clinical practice.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42016034057.

Drug-drug interactions and pharmacists' interventions among psychiatric patients in outpatient clinics of a teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia

Background

Lack of recognition of labeled drug-drug interactions (DDIs) is a type of medication error of particular relevance to the treatment of psychiatric patients. Pharmacists are in a position to detect and address potential DDIs.

Objective

This study aimed to explore pharmacists' role in the identification and management of DDIs among psychiatric patients in psychiatric outpatient clinics of a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Method

This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional medical chart review of patients visiting outpatient psychiatric clinics. It utilized medical records of patients who were taking any psychotropic medications and were prescribed at least one additional drug. The hospital Computerized Physician Order Entry system was used to identify DDIs and determine the pharmacists' interventions. The Beers criteria were applied to detect inappropriate prescribing among older patients.

Results

On average, the pharmacists intervened in 12 out of 213 (5.6%) cases of major or moderate DDIs. Older age, higher number of prescription medications, the severity of DDIs, and the utilization of lithium and anticoagulants were positively associated with the pharmacist undertaking an action.

Conclusion

Future studies should explore the prevalence rate of harmful DDIs among psychiatric patients on a large scale and examine the effectiveness of different pharmacy policies in the detection and management of DDIs.

Understanding Mental Health Nurses' Perceptions of Barcode Medication Administration: A Qualitative Descriptive Study

Barcode medication administration (BCMA) technology has been challenging for mental health nurses to incorporate into their clinical practice despite the potentially positive benefits of using the technology for improving patient safety. A review of the literature identified a number of practices that nurses can use to improve adoption of the technology, however, these practices have been primarily used in non-mental health contexts. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to understand mental health nurses' perceptions of practices identified from the literature to improve BCMA adoption in a mental health inpatient setting. Using a qualitative descriptive approach, ten (n = 10) interviews were conducted with direct care mental health nurses working at a mental health and addiction academic teaching hospital in Canada. Data analysis consisted of a conventional content analysis of the interview transcripts by two independent coders. The following five themes emerged from the transcripts: 1) safety, 2) clinical workflow, 3) education, 4) accountability, and 5) strategies. Sub-themes were also identified within the themes of safety and clinical workflow. Insights gleaned from this study warrant acknowledgement and consideration when implementing strategies to increase BCMA compliance within mental health contexts.

Potentially Inappropriate Prescribing of Oral Solid Medications in Elderly Dysphagic Patients

Pharmaceutical formulations suitable for dysphagic patients are not always commercially available, motivating caregivers to crush tablets or open capsules to facilitate swallowing. Since this action may modify the characteristics of the medicine, it should be considered potentially inappropriate. This paper is the first to focus on how hospitalization affected the rate of potentially inappropriate prescriptions (PIPs) and the incidence of dosage form-related PIPs in elderly patients with dysphagia. Data was collected by reviewing patient medical records in the Italian National Research Center on Aging of Ancona. The therapy at admission and discharge was analysed in terms of: inappropriate drug associations, inappropriate drugs for dysphagic patients, inappropriate dosage forms and inappropriate dosage form modifications. Forty-one dysphagic patients with an average age of 88.3 years were included in the study and 451 prescriptions were analysed. PIPs were widespread at admission, and hospitalization did not improve the situation in a statistically significant manner. The most common PIPs identified (>80%) were related to dosage form selection and modification. This study highlights a clear need for continuing medical education about prescription appropriateness and modification of solid dosage forms in patients with dysphagia.

What causes medication administration errors in a mental health hospital? A qualitative study with nursing staff

Objective

Medication administration errors (MAEs) are a common risk to patient safety in mental health hospitals, but an absence of in-depth studies to understand the underlying causes of these errors limits the development of effective remedial interventions. This study aimed to investigate the causes of MAEs affecting inpatients in a mental health National Health Service (NHS) hospital in the North West of England.

Methods

Registered and student mental health nurses working in inpatient psychiatric units were identified using a combination of direct advertisement and incident reports and invited to participate in semi-structured interviews utilising the critical incident technique. Interviews were designed to capture the participants’ experiences of inpatient MAEs. All interviews were transcribed verbatim and subject to framework analysis to illuminate the underlying active failures, error/violation-provoking conditions and latent failures according to Reason’s model of accident causation.

Results

A total of 20 participants described 26 MAEs (including 5 near misses) during the interviews. The majority of MAEs were skill-based slips and lapses (n = 16) or mistakes (n = 5), and were caused by a variety of interconnecting error/violation-provoking conditions relating to the patient, medicines used, medicines administration task, health care team, individual nurse and working environment. Some of these local conditions had origins in wider organisational latent failures. Recurrent and influential themes included inadequate staffing levels, unbalanced staff skill mix, interruptions/distractions, concerns with how the medicines administration task was approached and problems with communication.

Conclusions

To our knowledge this is the first published in-depth qualitative study to investigate the underlying causes of specific MAEs in a mental health hospital. Our findings revealed that MAEs may arise due to multiple interacting error and violation provoking conditions and latent ‘system’ failures, which emphasises the complexity of this everyday task facing practitioners in clinical practice. Future research should focus on developing and testing interventions which address key local and wider organisational ‘systems’ failures to reduce error.

Challenges and innovations of delivering medicines to older adults

Older adults with multimorbidity, polypharmacy, and complex health needs are the major consumer of health care. Ensuring that medicines are used safely, effectively, and delivered efficiently in this population is challenging. In this context, the approach to medicines delivery should seek to overcome some of the difficulties of delivering medicines to older people, and ensure each medication is delivered by the optimal and most convenient route for the patient in question. However, this poses significant obstacles, as the development of medicines suitable for use in older populations does not often account for complex health needs, potential challenges in relation to drug disposition, safety of excipients and limitations with practical usability of dosage forms. The objective of this review is to summarise and discuss current challenges and novel approaches to delivering medications to older adults.

Dosage form modification and oral drug delivery in older people

Many people cannot swallow whole tablets and capsules. The cause ranges from difficulties overriding the natural instinct to chew solids/foodstuff before swallowing, to a complex disorder of swallowing function affecting the ability to manage all food and fluid intake. Older people can experience swallowing difficulties because of co-morbidities, age-related physiological changes, and polypharmacy. To make medicines easier to swallow, many people will modify the medication dosage form e.g. split or crush tablets, and open capsules. Some of the challenges associated with administering medicines to older people, and issues with dosage form modification will be reviewed. Novel dosage forms in development are promising and may help overcome some of the issues. However, until these are more readily available, effective interdisciplinary teams, and improving patient health literacy will help reduce the risk of medication misadventures in older people.

Frequency and Nature of Medication Errors and Adverse Drug Events in Mental Health Hospitals: a Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Little is known about the frequency and nature of medication errors (MEs) and adverse drug events (ADEs) that occur in mental health hospitals.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aims to provide an up-to-date and critical appraisal of the epidemiology and nature of MEs and ADEs in this setting.

METHOD

Ten electronic databases were searched, including MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, PsycINFO, Scopus, British Nursing Index, ASSIA, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (1999 to October 2016). Studies that examined the rate of MEs or ADEs in mental health hospitals were included, and quality appraisal of the included studies was conducted.

RESULT

In total, 20 studies were identified. The rate of MEs ranged from 10.6 to 17.5 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2) and of ADEs from 10.0 to 42.0 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2) with 13.0-17.3% of ADEs found to be preventable. ADEs were rated as clinically significant (66.0-71.0%), serious (28.0-31.0%), or life threatening (1.4-2.0%). Prescribing errors occurred in 4.5-6.3% of newly written or omitted prescription items (n = 3); dispensing errors occurred in 4.6% of opportunities for error (n = 1) and in 8.8% of patients (n = 1); and medication administration errors occurred in 3.3-48.0% of opportunities for error (n = 5). MEs and ADEs were frequently associated with psychotropics, with atypical antipsychotic drugs commonly involved. Variability in study setting and data collection methods limited direct comparisons between studies.

CONCLUSION

Medication errors occur frequently in mental health hospitals and are associated with risk of patient harm. Effective interventions are needed to target these events and improve patient safety.

Thank you for asking: Exploring patient perceptions of barcode medication administration identification practices in inpatient mental health settings

BACKGROUND

Barcode medication administration systems have been implemented in a number of healthcare settings in an effort to decrease medication errors. To use the technology, nurses are required to login to an electronic health record, scan a medication and a form of patient identification to ensure that these correspond correctly with the ordered medications prior to medication administration. In acute care settings, patient wristbands have been traditionally used as a form of identification; however, past research has suggested that this method of identification may not be preferred in inpatient mental health settings. If barcode medication administration technology is to be effectively used in this context, healthcare organizations need to understand patient preferences with regards to identification methods.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to elicit patient perceptions of barcode medication administration identification practices in inpatient mental health settings. Insights gathered can be used to determine patient-centered preferences of identifying patients using barcode medication administration technology.

METHODS

Using a qualitative descriptive approach, fifty-two (n=52) inpatient interviews were completed by a Peer Support Worker using a semi-structured interview guide over a period of two months. Interviews were conducted in a number of inpatient mental health areas including forensic, youth, geriatric, acute, and rehabilitation services. An interprofessional team, inclusive of a Peer Support Worker, completed a thematic analysis of the interview data.

RESULTS

Six themes emerged as a result of the inductive data analysis. These included: management of information, privacy and security, stigma, relationships, safety and comfort, and negative associations with the technology. Patients also indicated that they would like a choice in the type of identification method used during barcode medication administration. As well, suggestions were made for how barcode medication administration practices could be modified to become more patient-centered.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study have a number of implications for healthcare organizations. As patients indicated that they would like a choice in the type of identification method used during barcode medication administration, healthcare organizations will need to determine how they can facilitate this process. Furthermore, many of the concerns that patients had with barcode medication administration technology could be addressed through patient education.

Potential underreporting of medication errors in a psychiatric general hospital in Japan

The purpose of this study was to explore a pattern of underreporting within a psychiatric general hospital in Japan. All the medication errors reported online in 2010 were analysed. This research was approved by the university and the study hospital. There were 651 incidents related to medication errors. Medication error rate per 1000 patient days was 2.14 (range: 0.45-6.05). Medication error rates between two acute care wards with comparable case and staff mix differed. A low proportion of intercepted near-misses and low medication error rates around mealtime in acute care 1 were suggestive of under-reporting. Two dementia care wards with low medication error rates had no report of intercepted errors, which was also suggestive of underreporting. Ward-specific medication error rates and patterns are useful to identify wards with potential underreporting of medication error within the hospital.

A fixed-dose combination of memantine extended-release and donepezil in the treatment of moderate-to-severe Alzheimer's disease

Currently available therapies for the treatment of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) consist of cholinesterase inhibitors (ChEIs), such as donepezil, and the N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist memantine. In December 2014, the US Food and Drug Administration approved Namzaric™, a once-daily, fixed-dose combination (FDC) of memantine extended-release (ER) and donepezil for patients with moderate-to-severe AD. The FDC capsule is bioequivalent to the coadministered individual drugs, and its bioavailability is similar when taken fasting, with food, or sprinkled onto applesauce. The combination of memantine and ChEIs in moderate-to-severe AD provides additional benefits to ChEI monotherapy across multiple domains and may delay the time to nursing home admission. A dedicated study of memantine ER compared to placebo in patients on a stable dose of a ChEI found statistically significant benefits on cognition and global status but not functioning. Treatment with memantine ER and donepezil is generally well tolerated, although higher doses of ChEIs are associated with more serious adverse events such as vomiting, syncope, and weight loss. Potential advantages of the FDC include a simpler treatment regimen, reduction in pill burden, and the ability to sprinkle the capsule onto soft foods. Patients who may benefit from the FDC include those with significant dysphagia, a history of poor compliance, or limited caregiver interaction. However, available evidence that these advantages would increase treatment adherence and persistence is conflicting, meaning that the added cost of switching patients from generic options to an FDC may not always be justified.

Effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes: an uncontrolled before and after study

OBJECTIVES

Residents of nursing homes often have difficulty swallowing (dysphagia), which complicates the administration of solid oral dosage formulations. Erroneously crushing medication is common, but few interventions have been tested to improve medication safety. Therefore, we evaluated the effect of warning symbols in combination with education on the frequency of erroneously crushing medication in nursing homes.

SETTING

This was a prospective uncontrolled intervention study with a preintervention and postintervention measurement. The study was conducted on 18 wards (total of 200 beds) in 3 nursing homes in the North of the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

We observed 36 nurses/nursing assistants (92% female; 92% nursing assistants) administering medication to 197 patients (62.9% female; mean age 81.6).

INTERVENTION

The intervention consisted of a set of warning symbols printed on each patient's unit dose packaging indicating whether or not a medication could be crushed as well as education of ward staff (lectures, newsletter and poster).

PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE

The relative risk (RR) of a crushing error occurring in the postintervention period compared to the preintervention period. A crushing error was defined as the crushing of a medication considered unsuitable to be crushed based on standard reference sources. Data were collected using direct (disguised) observation of nurses during drug administration.

RESULTS

The crushing error rate decreased from 3.1% (21 wrongly crushed medicines out of 681 administrations) to 0.5% (3/636), RR=0.15 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.51). Likewise, there was a significant reduction using data from patients with swallowing difficulties only, 87.5% (21 errors/24 medications) to 30.0% (3/10) (RR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13 to 0.89). Medications which were erroneously crushed included enteric-coated formulations (eg, omeprazole), medication with regulated release systems (eg, Persantin; dipyridamol) and toxic substances (eg, finasteride).

CONCLUSIONS

Warning symbols combined with education reduced erroneous crushing of medication, a well-known and common problem in nursing homes.

Optimising medication for Parkinson's disease patients with dysphagia

In addition to movement disorders, Parkinson's disease (PD) is associated with several nonmotor symptoms, including dysphagia (swallowing difficulties). Dysphagia can make the consumption of solid medicines difficult, which potentially contributes to the poor adherence that is common among people with PD. However, patients may be reluctant to admit that they experience dysphagia. Community nurses should actively enquire into swallowing difficulties among all patients, not only those with PD, and should work with pharmacists and other members of the multidisciplinary team to help optimise medication management to help improve adherence.

Pediatric medication administration errors and workflow following implementation of a bar code medication administration system

Direct observation was used to detect medication errors and Bar Code Medication Administration (BCMA) workarounds on two pediatric units and one neonatal unit at UCSF Benioff Children's Hospital. The study (1) measured the frequency of nursing medication administration-related errors, (2) characterized the types of medication errors, (3) assessed compliance with the institution's six medication administration safety processes, and (4) identified observed workarounds following BCMA implementation. The results of the direct observation were compared to medication administration-related incident reports (IRs) for the same period. The frequency of medication errors was 5% for the three units. Compliance with the process measures was achieved 86% of the time (range 23-100%). Seven medication administration-related IRs were submitted during the same observation period. Three BCMA workarounds were identified; (1) failure to visually confirm patient's identification, (2) failure to compare the medication to the electronic medication administration record at least twice before administration, and (3) charting administration of medication before actual administration. The direct observation methodology identified a low frequency of medication administration errors (MAEs) consistent with post-BCMA implementation. The incident reporting system identified different MAEs than direct observation suggesting that both methods should be used to better characterize the scope of MAEs.

Medication-administration errors in an urban mental health hospital: a direct observation study

In the present study, we aimed to identify the incidence, type, and potential clinical consequence of medication-administration errors made in a mental health hospital, and to investigate factors that might increase the risk of error. A prospective, direct observational technique was used to collect data from nurse medication rounds on each of the hospital's 43 inpatient wards. Regression analysis was used to identify potential error predictors. During the 172 medication rounds observed, 139 errors were detected in 4177 (3.3%) opportunities. The most common error was incorrect dose omission (52/139, 37%). Other common errors included incorrect dose (25/139, 18%), incorrect form (16/139, 12%), and incorrect time (12/139, 9%). Fifteen (11%) of the errors were of serious clinical severity; the rest were of negligible or minor severity. Factors that increased the risk of error included the nurse interrupting the medication round to attend to another activity, an increased number of 'when required' doses of medication administered, a higher number of patients on the ward, and an increased number of doses of medication due. These findings suggest that providers of inpatient mental health-care services should adopt medicine-administration systems that minimize task interruption and the use of 'when required' medication, as well as taking steps to reduce nursing workload.

Multicentre study to develop a medication safety package for decreasing inpatient harm from omission of time-critical medications

QUALITY ISSUE

Omitting time-critical medications leads to delays in treatment and may result in patient harm.

INITIAL ASSESSMENT

Published studies show that omission of prescribed medication doses is common. Although most are inconsequential, up to 86% of omitted medications place patients at some risk of harm.

SOLUTION

Funding was obtained to develop a medication safety package to facilitate decreasing omitted dose incidents by audit, education and feedback.

IMPLEMENTATION

A panel of nursing and pharmacy hospital staff in Victoria, Australia, reviewed existing audit tools and published studies to develop a critical medication list and audit tool. The tool, definitions and instructions were tested in 11 rural, urban and teaching hospitals. Qualitative feedback was sought to refine the tool using a Plan-Do-Study-Act model. An educational presentation was developed using reported incidents.

EVALUATION

Staff in 11 hospitals tested the audit tool in 321 patients receiving 17 361 doses of medication. Feedback indicated audit data were useful for informing improvements in practice and for accreditation. The educational material consists of the User Guide, plus a presentation for nursing staff illustrated by six cases with questions, with instructions on how to decrease harm from omitted doses by ensuring correct documentation and prioritising time-critical medications.

LESSONS LEARNED

A medication safety package using standard definitions and a critical medication list was successfully tested. It is now used by nursing and pharmacy staff across the state. Several interstate hospitals are using the tools as part of their hospital medication safety programmes.

Patients with chronic pain and dysphagia (CPD): unmet medical needs and pharmacologic treatment options

BACKGROUND

For properly selected patients experiencing chronic pain, extended-release opioid formulations may represent an appropriate pain management choice. For the many adults, elderly, and children who have medical conditions that make swallowing solid, oral-dose formulations difficult (dysphagia) or painful (odynophagia), this option may be limited. The combination of chronic pain with dysphagia (CPD) presents a challenge to physicians and patients alike when oral opioid analgesia is needed to control pain, but patients are unable to swallow solid, oral dosage forms.

METHODS

A Medline search was performed (1990 to 2013) using the search terms swallowing difficulties, dysphagia, odynophagia, adults, pediatrics, elderly, chronic pain, pain, and opioids. The following websites were searched: American Dysphagia Network, Dysphagia Research Society, World Health Organization, American Pain Society, International Association for the Study of Pain, American Academy of Pain Medicine, and American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians. Chronic pain guidelines from the following professional organizations were searched: American Pain Society, National Comprehensive Cancer Network, American Society of Interventional Pain Physicians, British Geriatric Society, European Society of Medical Oncology, World Health Organization, and the European Association for Palliative Care.

FINDINGS

There is an unmet medical need for greater recognition of dysphagia, awareness of potential problems with medication administration in these patients, recognition of alternative drug formulations that are available for use in CPD, and an appreciation that there are new, solid, oral-dose, opioid formulations in development that can mitigate these issues associated with swallowing difficulty while still providing practical, effective analgesia. Current pharmacologic treatments have limitations; new, prospective opioid formulations in clinical development may offer physicians and patients with CPD effective treatment options while mitigating accidental exposure and abuse liability.

CONCLUSIONS

The number of patients with CPD may be larger than is currently anticipated by healthcare providers. Physicians should proactively include a discussion of dysphagia as part of the patient examination. CPD is an unmet medical need. There are novel opioid formulations in clinical development that address the limitations of current opioid treatments. This manuscript reviews the problems associated with dysphagia on medication administration and adherence, currently available treatment options, and opioid analgesic formulations currently in clinical development.

Medicines management: an interview study of nurses at a secure psychiatric hospital

AIMS

To explore mental health nurses' knowledge, attitudes and clinical judgement concerning medicines management in an inpatient setting with a view to enhancing training.

BACKGROUND

Medicines management is a key role of mental health nurses, but little research has been conducted into their training needs.

DESIGN

An exploratory mixed-methods design was used involving individual interviews with participants to investigate their responses to hypothetical medicine administration scenarios.

METHODS

Interviews were held with a convenience sample of 50 Registered Nurses working in a specialist mental health hospital between November 2012-February 2013. Participants were presented with clinical vignettes describing eight scenarios they might encounter as part of their medicines management role and asked about how they would respond. Responses were assessed by two independent raters against ten quality standards underpinning the vignettes.

RESULTS

The median number of responses that were judged to demonstrate adequate awareness of associated quality standards was 4 (range 1-7), indicating that many participants did not appear to be aware of, or compliant with, current UK medicines management guidance and local policy. Many would not report a 'near miss' or medicines administration error. There was a lack of awareness of guidance on verbal prescribing, consent to treatment rules and the administration of off-label/unlicensed drugs. Past year attendance on a medicines management course, time since registration and self-reported knowledge of national standards for medicines administration did not discriminate between total score on the 10 quality standards.

CONCLUSION

The medicines management training needs of participants appeared not to be fully met by the existing learning sources. The use of vignettes to assess nurses' training needs requires evaluation in other settings.

Improving the safety and efficiency of nurse medication rounds through the introduction of an automated dispensing cabinet

Information technology (IT) systems are being utilised with increasing frequency at the prescribing and dispensing stage of the medicines-use process in UK hospitals. However, much less development has taken place with regard to the implementation of IT systems at the administration stage of medicines-use. A technology that has been implemented widely at the administration stage in North American hospitals is the automated dispensing cabinet (ADC), which has been shown to reduce nurse medication administration errors and reduce the time that nurses spend administering medication. The current project was undertaken to assess whether these benefits would be realised with the introduction of an ADC on an inpatient ward in a UK mental health hospital. Nurses were observed administering medication before and after the implementation of an ADC on a ward at East London NHS Foundation Trust (ELFT). The findings from these observations showed that the use of the ADC led to a reduction in the medication administration error rate from 8.9% to 7.2%; however, this reduction was solely accounted for by a reduction in errors of negligible clinical severity. The types of administration errors noted after implementation of the ADC remained largely unchanged from beforehand. The ADC was found to reduce the amount of time that nurses spent administering medication from 2.94 min per dose to 2.37 min per dose. It is estimated that this reduction could generate around 66 min of additional free nursing time per ward per day. As a standalone device, the ADC was found to improve the efficiency of the medicines-use process, but had little meaningful effect on medication administration error rate at ELFT. However, it could be anticipated that additional benefit with regard to reducing medication administration errors may be demonstrated if the ADC was used in combination with other IT systems, such as electronic prescribing.

Detection of medication-related problems in hospital practice: a review

This review examines the effectiveness of detection methods in terms of their ability to identify and accurately determine medication-related problems in hospitals. A search was conducted of databases from inception to June 2012. The following keywords were used in combination: medication error or adverse drug event or adverse drug reaction, comparison, detection, hospital and method. Seven detection methods were considered: chart review, claims data review, computer monitoring, direct care observation, interviews, prospective data collection and incident reporting. Forty relevant studies were located. Detection methods that were better able to identify medication-related problems compared with other methods tested in the same study included chart review, computer monitoring, direct care observation and prospective data collection. However, only small numbers of studies were involved in comparisons with direct care observation (n = 5) and prospective data collection (n = 6). There was little focus on detecting medication-related problems during various stages of the medication process, and comparisons associated with the seriousness of medication-related problems were examined in 19 studies. Only 17 studies involved appropriate comparisons with a gold standard, which provided details about sensitivities and specificities. In view of the relatively low identification of medication-related problems with incident reporting, use of this method in tracking trends over time should be met with some scepticism. Greater attention should be placed on combining methods, such as chart review and computer monitoring in examining trends. More research is needed on the use of claims data, direct care observation, interviews and prospective data collection as detection methods.

Barriers to the reporting of medication administration errors and near misses: an interview study of nurses at a psychiatric hospital

Medication administration errors and near misses are common including in mental health settings. Nurses should report all errors and near misses so that lessons can be learned and future mistakes avoided. We interviewed 50 nurses to find out if they would report an error that a colleague had made or if they would report a near-miss that they had. Less than half of nurses said they would report an error made by a colleague or a near-miss involving themselves. Nurses commonly said they would not report the errors or near misses because there was a good excuse for the error/near miss, because they lacked knowledge about whether it was an error/near miss or how to report it, because they feared the consequences of reporting it, or because reporting it was too much work. Mental health nurses mostly report similar reasons for not reporting errors and near misses as nurses working in general medical settings. We have not seen another study where nurses would not report an error or near miss because they thought there was a good excuse for it. Training programmes and policies should address all the reasons that prevent reporting of errors and near misses. Medication errors are a common and preventable cause of patient harm. Guidance for nurses indicates that all errors and near misses should be immediately reported in order to facilitate the development of a learning culture. However, medication errors and near misses have been under-researched in mental health settings. This study explored the reasons given by psychiatric nurses for not reporting a medication error made by a colleague, and the perceived barriers to near-miss reporting. We presented 50 nurses with clinical vignettes about error and near-miss reporting and interviewed them about their likely actions and about their views and perceptions. Less than half of participants would report an error made by a colleague (48%) or a near-miss involving themselves (40%). Thematic analysis revealed common themes for both not reporting an error or a near-miss were knowledge, fear, burden of work, and excusing the error. The first three themes are similar to results obtained from research in general medical settings, but the fourth appears to be novel. Many mental health nurses are not yet fully convinced of the need to report all errors and near misses, and that improvements could be made by increasing knowledge while reducing fear, burden of work, and excusing of errors.

Safeguarding the process of drug administration with an emphasis on electronic support tools

AIMS

The aim of this work is to understand the process of drug administration and identify points in the workflow that resulted in interventions by clinical information systems in order to improve patient safety.

METHODS

To identify a generic way to structure the drug administration process we performed peer-group discussions and supplemented these discussions with a literature search for studies reporting errors in drug administration and strategies for their prevention.

RESULTS

We concluded that the drug administration process might consist of up to 11 sub-steps, which can be grouped into the four sub-processes of preparation, personalization, application and follow-up. Errors in drug handling and administration are diverse and frequent and in many cases not caused by the patient him/herself, but by family members or nurses. Accordingly, different prevention strategies have been set in place with relatively few approaches involving e-health technology.

CONCLUSIONS

A generic structuring of the administration process and particular error-prone sub-steps may facilitate the allocation of prevention strategies and help to identify research gaps.

The medication process in a psychiatric hospital: are errors a potential threat to patient safety?

PURPOSE

To investigate the frequency, type, and potential severity of errors in several stages of the medication process in an inpatient psychiatric setting.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study using three methods for detecting errors: (1) direct observation; (2) unannounced control visits in the wards collecting dispensed drugs; and (3) chart reviews. All errors, except errors in discharge summaries, were assessed for potential consequences by two clinical pharmacologists.

SETTING

Three psychiatric wards with adult patients at Aalborg University Hospital, Denmark, from January 2010-April 2010.

THE OBSERVATIONAL UNIT

The individual handling of medication (prescribing, dispensing, and administering).

RESULTS

In total, 189 errors were detected in 1,082 opportunities for error (17%) of which 84/998 (8%) were assessed as potentially harmful. The frequency of errors was: prescribing, 10/189 (5%); dispensing, 18/189 (10%); administration, 142/189 (75%); and discharge summaries, 19/189 (10%). The most common errors were omission of pro re nata dosing regime in computerized physician order entry, omission of dose, lack of identity control, and omission of drug.

CONCLUSION

Errors throughout the medication process are common in psychiatric wards to an extent which resembles error rates in somatic care. Despite a substantial proportion of errors with potential to harm patients, very few errors were considered potentially fatal. Medical staff needs greater awareness of medication safety and guidelines related to the medication process. Many errors in this study might potentially be prevented by nursing staff when handling medication and observing patients for effect and side effects of medication. The nurses' role in psychiatric medication safety should be further explored as nurses appear to be in the unique position to intercept errors before they reach the patient.

Are interventions to reduce interruptions and errors during medication administration effective?: a systematic review

Background

Medication administration errors are frequent and lead to patient harm. Interruptions during medication administration have been implicated as a potential contributory factor.

Objective

To assess evidence of the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing interruptions during medication administration on interruption and medication administration error rates.

Methods

In September 2012 we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group reviews, Google and Google Scholar, and hand searched references of included articles. Intervention studies reporting quantitative data based on direct observations of at least one outcome (interruptions, or medication administration errors) were included.

Results

Ten studies, eight from North America and two from Europe, met the inclusion criteria. Five measured significant changes in interruption rates pre and post interventions. Four found a significant reduction and one an increase. Three studies measured changes in medication administration error rates and showed reductions, but all implemented multiple interventions beyond those targeted at reducing interruptions. No study used a controlled design pre and post. Definitions for key outcome indicators were reported in only four studies. Only one study reported κ scores for inter-rater reliability and none of the multi-ward studies accounted for clustering in their analyses.

Conclusions

There is weak evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to significantly reduce interruption rates and very limited evidence of their effectiveness to reduce medication administration errors. Policy makers should proceed with great caution in implementing such interventions until controlled trials confirm their value. Research is also required to better understand the complex relationship between interruptions and error to support intervention design.

Drug administration errors in hospital inpatients: a systematic review

CONTEXT

Drug administration in the hospital setting is the last barrier before a possible error reaches the patient.

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to analyze the prevalence and nature of administration error rate detected by the observation method.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, MEDLINE, Cochrane Library from 1966 to December 2011 and reference lists of included studies.

STUDY SELECTION

Observational studies, cross-sectional studies, before-and-after studies, and randomized controlled trials that measured the rate of administration errors in inpatients were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers (senior pharmacists) independently identified studies for inclusion. One reviewer extracted the data; the second reviewer checked the data. The main outcome was the error rate calculated as being the number of errors without wrong time errors divided by the Total Opportunity for Errors (TOE, sum of the total number of doses ordered plus the unordered doses given), and multiplied by 100. For studies that reported it, clinical impact was reclassified into four categories from fatal to minor or no impact. Due to a large heterogeneity, results were expressed as median values (interquartile range, IQR), according to their study design.

RESULTS

Among 2088 studies, a total of 52 reported TOE. Most of the studies were cross-sectional studies (N=46). The median error rate without wrong time errors for the cross-sectional studies using TOE was 10.5% [IQR: 7.3%-21.7%]. No fatal error was observed and most errors were classified as minor in the 18 studies in which clinical impact was analyzed. We did not find any evidence of publication bias.

CONCLUSIONS

Administration errors are frequent among inpatients. The median error rate without wrong time errors for the cross-sectional studies using TOE was about 10%. A standardization of administration error rate using the same denominator (TOE), numerator and types of errors is essential for further publications.