Immunisation errors reported to a vaccine advice service: intelligence to improve practice.

Quality in primary care Pub Date : 2014-01-01
Sarah Lang, Karen J Ford, Tessa John, Andrew J Pollard, Noel D McCarthy
{"title":"Immunisation errors reported to a vaccine advice service: intelligence to improve practice.","authors":"Sarah Lang,&nbsp;Karen J Ford,&nbsp;Tessa John,&nbsp;Andrew J Pollard,&nbsp;Noel D McCarthy","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The success of immunisation programmes depends on the quality with which they are administered. The Vaccine Advice for CliniCians Service (VACCSline) is an advice service to support immunisers and promote excellence in immunisation practice, through specialist guidance and local education, covering a catchment population of two million people. All enquiries are recorded onto a database and categorised. Vaccine error is selected when a vaccine has not been prepared or administered according to national recommendations or relevant expert guidance.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>All enquiries from 2009 to 2011, categorised on the VACCSline database as 'vaccine error' were analysed and subjected to a detailed free-text review.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 4301 enquiries, 158 (3.7%) concerned vaccine errors. The greatest frequency of errors, 145 (92.9%) concerned immunisations delivered in primary care services; 92% of all errors occurred during either vaccine selection and preparation or history checking and scheduling. Administration of the wrong vaccine was the most frequent error recorded in 33.3% of reports. A shared first letter of the vaccine name was noted to occur in 13 error reports in which the incorrect vaccine was inadvertently administered. Consultations involving pairs of siblings were associated with various errors in seven enquiries. Failure to revaccinate after spillage (seven reports) showed a widespread knowledge gap in this area.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Advice line enquiries provide intelligence to alert immunisers to the errors that are commonly reported and may serve to highlight processes that predispose to errors, thus informing immuniser training and updating.</p>","PeriodicalId":88096,"journal":{"name":"Quality in primary care","volume":"22 3","pages":"139-46"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2014-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quality in primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The success of immunisation programmes depends on the quality with which they are administered. The Vaccine Advice for CliniCians Service (VACCSline) is an advice service to support immunisers and promote excellence in immunisation practice, through specialist guidance and local education, covering a catchment population of two million people. All enquiries are recorded onto a database and categorised. Vaccine error is selected when a vaccine has not been prepared or administered according to national recommendations or relevant expert guidance.

Method: All enquiries from 2009 to 2011, categorised on the VACCSline database as 'vaccine error' were analysed and subjected to a detailed free-text review.

Results: Of 4301 enquiries, 158 (3.7%) concerned vaccine errors. The greatest frequency of errors, 145 (92.9%) concerned immunisations delivered in primary care services; 92% of all errors occurred during either vaccine selection and preparation or history checking and scheduling. Administration of the wrong vaccine was the most frequent error recorded in 33.3% of reports. A shared first letter of the vaccine name was noted to occur in 13 error reports in which the incorrect vaccine was inadvertently administered. Consultations involving pairs of siblings were associated with various errors in seven enquiries. Failure to revaccinate after spillage (seven reports) showed a widespread knowledge gap in this area.

Conclusion: Advice line enquiries provide intelligence to alert immunisers to the errors that are commonly reported and may serve to highlight processes that predispose to errors, thus informing immuniser training and updating.

向疫苗咨询服务机构报告的免疫错误:改进实践的情报。
背景:免疫规划的成功取决于实施免疫规划的质量。临床医生疫苗咨询服务(VACCSline)是一项咨询服务,通过专家指导和地方教育,支持免疫接种者并促进卓越的免疫实践,覆盖200万人。所有查询都记录在数据库中并进行分类。当疫苗未按照国家建议或相关专家指导制备或施用时,选择疫苗错误。方法:对2009年至2011年在VACCSline数据库中归类为“疫苗错误”的所有查询进行分析,并进行详细的自由文本审查。结果:4301例查询中,158例(3.7%)涉及疫苗差错。错误发生率最高的是145起(92.9%),涉及初级保健服务中提供的免疫接种;92%的错误发生在疫苗选择和准备或历史检查和调度期间。在33.3%的报告中,错误接种疫苗是最常见的错误记录。注意到在13份错误报告中出现了疫苗名称首字母相同的情况,其中无意中接种了错误的疫苗。涉及兄弟姐妹对的咨询与七个查询中的各种错误有关。泄漏后未能重新接种疫苗(七份报告)表明在这一领域存在广泛的知识差距。结论:咨询热线查询提供了情报,提醒免疫接种人员注意通常报告的错误,并可能有助于突出易导致错误的过程,从而为免疫接种人员的培训和更新提供信息。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信