Systemic analysis of medication administration omission errors in a tertiary-care hospital in Quebec

Observational study on medication administration errors at a University Hospital in Brazil: incidence, nature and associated factors

Background

Medication administration errors are frequent and cause significant harm globally. However, only a few data are available on their prevalence, nature, and severity in developing countries, particularly in Brazil. This study attempts to determine the incidence, nature, and factors associated with medication administration errors observed in a university hospital.

Methods

This was a prospective observational study, conducted in a clinical and surgical unit of a University Hospital in Brazil. Two previously trained professionals directly observed medication preparation and administration for 15 days, 24 h a day, in February 2020. The type of error, the category of the medication involved, according to the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification system, and associated risk factors were analyzed. Multivariate logistic regression was adopted to identify factors associated with errors.

Results

The administration of 561 drug doses was observed. The mean total medication administration error rate was 36.2% (95% confidence interval 32.3–40.2). The main factors associated with time errors were interruptions. Regarding technique errors, the primary factors observed were the route of administration, interruptions, and workload.

Conclusions

Here, we identified a high total medication administration error rate, the most frequent being technique, wrong time, dose, and omission errors. The factors associated with errors were interruptions, route of administration and workload, which agrees well with the results of other national and international studies.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s40545-022-00443-x.

Associations of person-related, environment-related and communication-related factors on medication errors in public and private hospitals: a retrospective clinical audit

BACKGROUND

Efforts to ensure safe and optimal medication management are crucial in reducing the prevalence of medication errors. The aim of this study was to determine the associations of person-related, environment-related and communication-related factors on the severity of medication errors occurring in two health services.

METHODS

A retrospective clinical audit of medication errors was undertaken over an 18-month period at two Australian health services comprising 16 hospitals. Descriptive statistical analysis, and univariate and multivariable regression analysis were undertaken.

RESULTS

There were 11,540 medication errors reported to the online facility of both health services. Medication errors caused by doctors (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.690, 95% CI 0.618-0.771), or by pharmacists (OR 0.327, 95% CI 0.267-0.401), or by patients or families (OR 0.641, 95% CI 0.472-0.870) compared to those caused by nurses or midwives were significantly associated with reduced odds of possibly or probably harmful medication errors. The presence of double-checking of medication orders compared to single-checking (OR 0.905, 95% CI 0.826-0.991) was significantly associated with reduced odds of possibly or probably harmful medication errors. The presence of electronic systems for prescribing (OR 0.580, 95% CI 0.480-0.705) and dispensing (OR 0.350, 95% CI 0.199-0.618) were significantly associated with reduced odds of possibly or probably harmful medication errors compared to the absence of these systems. Conversely, insufficient counselling of patients (OR 3.511, 95% CI 2.512-4.908), movement across transitions of care (OR 1.461, 95% CI 1.190-1.793), presence of interruptions (OR 1.432, 95% CI 1.012-2.027), presence of covering personnel (OR 1.490, 95% 1.113-1.995), misread or unread orders (OR 2.411, 95% CI 2.162-2.690), informal bedside conversations (OR 1.221, 95% CI 1.085-1.373), and problems with clinical handovers (OR 1.559, 95% CI 1.136-2.139) were associated with increased odds of medication errors causing possible or probable harm. Patients or families were involved in the detection of 1100 (9.5%) medication errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients and families need to be engaged in discussions about medications, and health professionals need to provide teachable opportunities during bedside conversations, admission and discharge consultations, and medication administration activities. Patient counselling needs to be more targeted in effort to reduce medication errors associated with possible or probable harm.

Characteristics of Reported Pediatric Medication Errors in Northern Ireland and Use in Quality Improvement

BACKGROUND

To protect children from harm, clinicians, educators, and patient safety champions need information to direct improvement efforts. Critical incident data could provide this but are often disregarded as a source of evidence because under-reporting makes them an inaccurate measure of error rates.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to identify key targets for pediatric healthcare quality improvement. The objective was to evaluate the types, characteristics, and areas of risk within reported medication errors in pediatric patients.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study of a large regional dataset of 1522 pediatric medication errors reported from secondary care between 2011 and 2015, including all hospitals and community pediatric settings in Northern Ireland. The following characteristics were included: error severity, patient age, drug involved, error type, and area of practice. Two academic pediatricians, a senior medicines governance pharmacist, a Reader in Pharmacy Practice, and a Professor of Medical Education analyzed the data. Validity checks included comparing the findings against key published literature and discussion by a practitioner panel representing five multidisciplinary stakeholder groups.

RESULTS

Neonates, particularly in intensive care, were implicated in 19% of all errors. The medications most represented in risk were antimicrobials, paracetamol, vaccines, and intravenous fluids. The error types most implicated were dosing errors (32%) and omissions (21%).

CONCLUSIONS

Incident reports identified neonates, a shortlist of drugs, and specific error types, associated with modifiable behaviors, as priority improvement targets. These findings direct further study and inform intervention development, such as specific training in calculations to prevent dosing errors. Involving experienced practitioners both endorsed the findings and engaged the practice community in their future implementation. The utility of incident reports to direct improvement efforts may offset the limitations in their representativeness.