Intravenous Medication Administration Errors in Hospitalised Patients: An Updated Systematic Review

IF 2.1 4区医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice Pub Date : 2025-06-22 DOI:10.1111/jep.70167

Sutha Rajakumar, Retha Rajah, Subramaniam Thanimalai, Fadzlin binti Mohd Mokhtar, Dinesh Sangarran Ramachandram

{"title":"Intravenous Medication Administration Errors in Hospitalised Patients: An Updated Systematic Review","authors":"Sutha Rajakumar, Retha Rajah, Subramaniam Thanimalai, Fadzlin binti Mohd Mokhtar, Dinesh Sangarran Ramachandram","doi":"10.1111/jep.70167","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Administering intravenous (IV) drugs carries a high risk of adverse effects due to their direct entry into circulation. Identifying the prevalence and types of IV administration errors and the drugs involved is crucial for implementing effective interventions to reduce such errors.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Aim</h3>\n \n <p>This systematic review aimed to examine and synthesise the available articles on medication errors involving IV administration in hospitalised patients.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>A comprehensive search was conducted using electronic databases, including PubMed, Ovid Medline, and CINAHL. The search was performed without time limitation up to July 2023. However, only articles published in English and human subjects were included. The quality of the studies was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS). This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023469352).</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Result</h3>\n \n <p>Database searches yielded 2177 articles; after duplicate removal, 1717 underwent title and abstract screening, and 23 were included after full-text review. The studies were from 12 countries, and the multicentre study included countries from Europe, Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Australia. The majority of the studies were conducted in either teaching hospitals (<i>n</i> = 11) or university-affiliated hospitals (<i>n</i> = 7), with most involving direct observation (<i>n</i> = 21). IV administration errors exhibit a broad prevalence range of 5.0%−62.9%, involving various types such as wrong diluent, dose, route, rate, technique, omission, and timing. Studies lack uniformity in reporting, with some not specifying prevalence. The highest prevalence of specific errors varies across settings.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>Our review highlights that IV medication error rates vary based on study design, setting, and population. Standardised definitions, reporting procedures, and reliable tracking methods are needed. Human factors, system issues, and environmental stressors influence medication errors. Future research must improve our understanding and address these factors to enhance patient safety and healthcare quality.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":15997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","volume":"31 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jep.70167","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of evaluation in clinical practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jep.70167","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

Administering intravenous (IV) drugs carries a high risk of adverse effects due to their direct entry into circulation. Identifying the prevalence and types of IV administration errors and the drugs involved is crucial for implementing effective interventions to reduce such errors.

Aim

This systematic review aimed to examine and synthesise the available articles on medication errors involving IV administration in hospitalised patients.

Methods

A comprehensive search was conducted using electronic databases, including PubMed, Ovid Medline, and CINAHL. The search was performed without time limitation up to July 2023. However, only articles published in English and human subjects were included. The quality of the studies was appraised using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale (NOS). This systematic review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023469352).

Result

Database searches yielded 2177 articles; after duplicate removal, 1717 underwent title and abstract screening, and 23 were included after full-text review. The studies were from 12 countries, and the multicentre study included countries from Europe, Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Australia. The majority of the studies were conducted in either teaching hospitals (n = 11) or university-affiliated hospitals (n = 7), with most involving direct observation (n = 21). IV administration errors exhibit a broad prevalence range of 5.0%−62.9%, involving various types such as wrong diluent, dose, route, rate, technique, omission, and timing. Studies lack uniformity in reporting, with some not specifying prevalence. The highest prevalence of specific errors varies across settings.

Conclusion

Our review highlights that IV medication error rates vary based on study design, setting, and population. Standardised definitions, reporting procedures, and reliable tracking methods are needed. Human factors, system issues, and environmental stressors influence medication errors. Future research must improve our understanding and address these factors to enhance patient safety and healthcare quality.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

住院患者静脉给药错误：最新的系统综述

背景静脉注射（IV）药物由于其直接进入血液循环而具有很高的不良反应风险。确定静脉给药错误的发生率和类型以及所涉及的药物对于实施有效的干预措施以减少此类错误至关重要。目的本系统综述旨在检查和综合有关住院患者静脉给药错误的现有文献。方法利用PubMed、Ovid Medline、CINAHL等电子数据库进行综合检索。搜索的时间截止到2023年7月。然而，只包括以英语和人类主题发表的文章。采用纽卡斯尔-渥太华质量评估量表（NOS）对研究的质量进行评价。本系统评价已在普洛斯彼罗注册（CRD42023469352）。结果数据库检索得到2177篇文章；删除重复后，1717篇进行了标题和摘要筛选，23篇进行了全文审查。这些研究来自12个国家，多中心研究包括来自欧洲、非洲、美洲、亚洲和澳大利亚的国家。大多数研究是在教学医院（n = 11）或大学附属医院（n = 7）进行的，其中大部分是直接观察（n = 21）。静脉给药错误的发生率为5.0% ~ 62.9%，包括各种类型的错误稀释剂、剂量、途径、比率、技术、遗漏和时间。研究报告缺乏一致性，有些研究没有具体说明患病率。具体错误的最高流行率因设置而异。结论：我们的综述强调静脉用药错误率因研究设计、环境和人群而异。需要标准化的定义、报告程序和可靠的跟踪方法。人为因素、系统问题和环境压力因素影响用药错误。未来的研究必须提高我们的理解和解决这些因素，以提高患者安全和医疗质量。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of evaluation in clinical practice 医学-卫生保健

CiteScore

4.80

自引率

4.20%

发文量

143

审稿时长

3-8 weeks

期刊介绍： The Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice aims to promote the evaluation and development of clinical practice across medicine, nursing and the allied health professions. All aspects of health services research and public health policy analysis and debate are of interest to the Journal whether studied from a population-based or individual patient-centred perspective. Of particular interest to the Journal are submissions on all aspects of clinical effectiveness and efficiency including evidence-based medicine, clinical practice guidelines, clinical decision making, clinical services organisation, implementation and delivery, health economic evaluation, health process and outcome measurement and new or improved methods (conceptual and statistical) for systematic inquiry into clinical practice. Papers may take a classical quantitative or qualitative approach to investigation (or may utilise both techniques) or may take the form of learned essays, structured/systematic reviews and critiques.