Deviations From Recommended Drug Dosing in the Prehospital Treatment of Pediatric Patients.

IF 2 3区 医学 Q2 EMERGENCY MEDICINE
Michael F Spigner, Mitchell W Butterbaugh, Nicholas A Genthe, Adam M Brown, Michael Lohmeier, Craig Tschautscher, Sriram Ramgopal, Megan Yank, Megan L Barthels, Gregory J Raupp, Joseph Stearns, Michael K Kim
{"title":"Deviations From Recommended Drug Dosing in the Prehospital Treatment of Pediatric Patients.","authors":"Michael F Spigner, Mitchell W Butterbaugh, Nicholas A Genthe, Adam M Brown, Michael Lohmeier, Craig Tschautscher, Sriram Ramgopal, Megan Yank, Megan L Barthels, Gregory J Raupp, Joseph Stearns, Michael K Kim","doi":"10.1080/10903127.2026.2740143","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Pediatric medication safety is a priority area for research and quality improvement in emergency medical services (EMS). While medication errors may occur due to active failures, latent drivers of deviations from recommended dosages (DRD) are incompletely understood. We sought to understand the prevalence of DRDs and the factors associated with them.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients included in a quality improvement registry for prehospital pediatric medication safety. We included nine EMS agencies with uniform patient care protocols providing 9-1-1 services to the metropolitan area of a midsized city in the U.S. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DRDs (doses ≥20% above or below protocolized doses). We identified DRDs by checking weight-based doses against weight-based and absolute thresholds. We assessed the prevalence of DRDs by medication, age, clinician impression, and administration route. We assessed associations between these factors and DRDs with logistic regression, then performed adjusted analyses with generalized linear mixed models. We assessed the relationship between weight estimation error and DRDs with a linear mixed model. We explored the potential effect of fixed-dosage formulations, full-vial doses, and volumetric limits of intranasal administration on DRDs.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We analyzed 386 medication administrations for 240 patients. The overall prevalence of DRDs was 46.4% (<i>n</i> = 179), and most were underdoses (<i>n</i> = 143, 79.9%). Among common medications, the number and prevalence of DRDs were: ondansetron (<i>n</i> = 29, 85.3%), midazolam (<i>n</i> = 35, 50.0%), fentanyl (<i>n</i> = 55, 45.5%), and epinephrine (<i>n</i> = 26, 44.8%). The DRDs were most common <i>via</i> the intranasal route (<i>n</i> = 62, 69.7%) and among school-aged children (<i>n</i> = 50, 55.6%). Ondansetron (aOR 36.9, 95%CI 6.3-217.6) and the intranasal route (aOR 7.3, 95%CI 2.9-18.6) were associated with higher odds of DRDs. We found no association between weight estimation error and DRDs. Exclusion of potential fixed-dosage formulations and full-vial doses was associated with fewer DRDs (81.6% vs. 42.5%). Only 2% of intranasal fentanyl DRDs could be explained by volumetric limits.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We observed DRDs to be common in the prehospital treatment of children, and they varied by medication and route. Possible latent sources of error include protocol design, medication formularies, and heuristics. The clinical significance of DRDs is uncertain.</p>","PeriodicalId":20336,"journal":{"name":"Prehospital Emergency Care","volume":" ","pages":"1-10"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Prehospital Emergency Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10903127.2026.2740143","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EMERGENCY MEDICINE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: Pediatric medication safety is a priority area for research and quality improvement in emergency medical services (EMS). While medication errors may occur due to active failures, latent drivers of deviations from recommended dosages (DRD) are incompletely understood. We sought to understand the prevalence of DRDs and the factors associated with them.

Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients included in a quality improvement registry for prehospital pediatric medication safety. We included nine EMS agencies with uniform patient care protocols providing 9-1-1 services to the metropolitan area of a midsized city in the U.S. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of DRDs (doses ≥20% above or below protocolized doses). We identified DRDs by checking weight-based doses against weight-based and absolute thresholds. We assessed the prevalence of DRDs by medication, age, clinician impression, and administration route. We assessed associations between these factors and DRDs with logistic regression, then performed adjusted analyses with generalized linear mixed models. We assessed the relationship between weight estimation error and DRDs with a linear mixed model. We explored the potential effect of fixed-dosage formulations, full-vial doses, and volumetric limits of intranasal administration on DRDs.

Results: We analyzed 386 medication administrations for 240 patients. The overall prevalence of DRDs was 46.4% (n = 179), and most were underdoses (n = 143, 79.9%). Among common medications, the number and prevalence of DRDs were: ondansetron (n = 29, 85.3%), midazolam (n = 35, 50.0%), fentanyl (n = 55, 45.5%), and epinephrine (n = 26, 44.8%). The DRDs were most common via the intranasal route (n = 62, 69.7%) and among school-aged children (n = 50, 55.6%). Ondansetron (aOR 36.9, 95%CI 6.3-217.6) and the intranasal route (aOR 7.3, 95%CI 2.9-18.6) were associated with higher odds of DRDs. We found no association between weight estimation error and DRDs. Exclusion of potential fixed-dosage formulations and full-vial doses was associated with fewer DRDs (81.6% vs. 42.5%). Only 2% of intranasal fentanyl DRDs could be explained by volumetric limits.

Conclusions: We observed DRDs to be common in the prehospital treatment of children, and they varied by medication and route. Possible latent sources of error include protocol design, medication formularies, and heuristics. The clinical significance of DRDs is uncertain.

儿科患者院前治疗中与推荐用药剂量的偏差
目的:儿科用药安全是紧急医疗服务(EMS)研究和质量改进的优先领域。虽然药物错误可能由于主动失效而发生,但偏离推荐剂量(DRD)的潜在驱动因素尚未完全了解。我们试图了解DRDs的患病率及其相关因素。方法:我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究,纳入院前儿科用药安全质量改进登记处的患者。我们纳入了9家EMS机构,这些机构采用统一的患者护理方案,为美国一个中等城市的大都市区提供9-1-1服务。我们的主要结局是DRDs的患病率(剂量高于或低于协议剂量≥20%)。我们通过检查基于体重的剂量与基于体重和绝对阈值来确定drd。我们通过用药、年龄、临床医生印象和给药途径来评估DRDs的患病率。我们用逻辑回归评估了这些因素与DRDs之间的关系,然后用广义线性混合模型进行了调整分析。我们用线性混合模型评估了权重估计误差与DRDs之间的关系。我们探讨了固定剂量制剂、整瓶剂量和鼻内给药的体积限制对DRDs的潜在影响。结果:我们分析了240例患者的386个用药方案。DRDs的总体患病率为46.4% (n = 179),其中大多数为剂量不足(n = 143, 79.9%)。常见药物中,不良反应发生率和数量分别为:昂丹司琼(n = 29, 85.3%)、咪达唑仑(n = 35, 50.0%)、芬太尼(n = 55, 45.5%)、肾上腺素(n = 26, 44.8%)。鼻内途径(n = 62, 69.7%)和学龄儿童(n = 50, 55.6%)的DRDs最为常见。昂丹司琼(aOR 36.9, 95%CI 6.3-217.6)和鼻内途径(aOR 7.3, 95%CI 2.9-18.6)与较高的DRDs发生率相关。我们没有发现权重估计误差和DRDs之间的关联。排除潜在的固定剂量制剂和全瓶剂量与较少的drd相关(81.6% vs. 42.5%)。只有2%的芬太尼鼻内DRDs可以用容量限制来解释。结论:我们观察到DRDs在儿童院前治疗中很常见,并且随着用药和途径的不同而有所不同。可能的潜在错误来源包括方案设计、药物处方和启发式。DRDs的临床意义尚不确定。
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
Prehospital Emergency Care
Prehospital Emergency Care 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
12.50%
发文量
137
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Prehospital Emergency Care publishes peer-reviewed information relevant to the practice, educational advancement, and investigation of prehospital emergency care, including the following types of articles: Special Contributions - Original Articles - Education and Practice - Preliminary Reports - Case Conferences - Position Papers - Collective Reviews - Editorials - Letters to the Editor - Media Reviews.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书