Johanna I. Westbrook, Ling Li, Amanda Woods, Tim Badgery-Parker, Virginia Mumford, Alison Merchant, Erin Fitzpatrick, Magdalena Z. Raban
{"title":"与儿童用药错误相关的风险因素:儿科住院患者的前瞻性直接观察研究","authors":"Johanna I. Westbrook, Ling Li, Amanda Woods, Tim Badgery-Parker, Virginia Mumford, Alison Merchant, Erin Fitzpatrick, Magdalena Z. Raban","doi":"10.1007/s40264-024-01408-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Introduction</h3><p>Limited evidence exists regarding medication administration errors (MAEs) on general paediatric wards or associated risk factors exists.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Objective</h3><p>The aim of this study was to identify nurse, medication, and work-environment factors associated with MAEs among paediatric inpatients.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective, direct observational study of 298 nurses in a paediatric referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. Trained observers recorded details of 5137 doses prepared and administered to 1530 children between 07:00 h and 22:00 h on weekdays and weekends. Observation data were compared with medication charts to identify errors. Clinical errors, potential severity and actual harm were assessed. Nurse characteristics (e.g. age, sex, experience), medication type (route, high-risk medications, use of solvent/diluent), and work variables (e.g. time of administration, weekday/weekend, use of an electronic medication management system [eMM], presence of a parent/carer) were collected. Multivariable models assessed MAE risk factors for any error, errors by route, potentially serious errors, and errors involving high-risk medication or causing actual harm.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Results</h3><p>Errors occurred in 37.0% (<i>n</i> = 1899; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35.7–38.3) of administrations, 25.8% (<i>n</i> = 489; 95% CI 23.8–27.9) of which were rated as potentially serious. Intravenous infusions and injections had high error rates (64.7% [<i>n</i> = 514], 95% CI 61.3–68.0; and 77.4% [<i>n</i> = 188], 95% CI 71.7–82.2, respectively). For intravenous injections, 59.7% (95% CI 53.4–65.6) had potentially serious errors. No nurse characteristics were associated with MAEs. Intravenous route, early morning and weekend administrations, patient age ≥ 11 years, oral medications requiring solvents/diluents and eMM use were all significant risk factors. MAEs causing actual harm were 45% lower using an eMM compared with paper charts.</p><h3 data-test=\"abstract-sub-heading\">Conclusion</h3><p>Medication error prevention strategies should target intravenous administrations and not neglect older children in hospital. Attention to nurses’ work environments, including improved design and integration of medication technologies, is warranted.</p>","PeriodicalId":11382,"journal":{"name":"Drug Safety","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Risk Factors Associated with Medication Administration Errors in Children: A Prospective Direct Observational Study of Paediatric Inpatients\",\"authors\":\"Johanna I. Westbrook, Ling Li, Amanda Woods, Tim Badgery-Parker, Virginia Mumford, Alison Merchant, Erin Fitzpatrick, Magdalena Z. Raban\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s40264-024-01408-6\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Introduction</h3><p>Limited evidence exists regarding medication administration errors (MAEs) on general paediatric wards or associated risk factors exists.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Objective</h3><p>The aim of this study was to identify nurse, medication, and work-environment factors associated with MAEs among paediatric inpatients.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Methods</h3><p>This was a prospective, direct observational study of 298 nurses in a paediatric referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. Trained observers recorded details of 5137 doses prepared and administered to 1530 children between 07:00 h and 22:00 h on weekdays and weekends. Observation data were compared with medication charts to identify errors. Clinical errors, potential severity and actual harm were assessed. Nurse characteristics (e.g. age, sex, experience), medication type (route, high-risk medications, use of solvent/diluent), and work variables (e.g. time of administration, weekday/weekend, use of an electronic medication management system [eMM], presence of a parent/carer) were collected. Multivariable models assessed MAE risk factors for any error, errors by route, potentially serious errors, and errors involving high-risk medication or causing actual harm.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Results</h3><p>Errors occurred in 37.0% (<i>n</i> = 1899; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35.7–38.3) of administrations, 25.8% (<i>n</i> = 489; 95% CI 23.8–27.9) of which were rated as potentially serious. Intravenous infusions and injections had high error rates (64.7% [<i>n</i> = 514], 95% CI 61.3–68.0; and 77.4% [<i>n</i> = 188], 95% CI 71.7–82.2, respectively). For intravenous injections, 59.7% (95% CI 53.4–65.6) had potentially serious errors. No nurse characteristics were associated with MAEs. Intravenous route, early morning and weekend administrations, patient age ≥ 11 years, oral medications requiring solvents/diluents and eMM use were all significant risk factors. MAEs causing actual harm were 45% lower using an eMM compared with paper charts.</p><h3 data-test=\\\"abstract-sub-heading\\\">Conclusion</h3><p>Medication error prevention strategies should target intravenous administrations and not neglect older children in hospital. Attention to nurses’ work environments, including improved design and integration of medication technologies, is warranted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11382,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Drug Safety\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-05\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Drug Safety\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-024-01408-6\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Drug Safety","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-024-01408-6","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
导言:关于普通儿科病房用药错误(MAEs)或相关风险因素的证据有限。本研究旨在确定与儿科住院患者用药错误相关的护士、用药和工作环境因素。训练有素的观察者详细记录了平日和周末 7:00 至 22:00 期间为 1530 名儿童配制和用药的 5137 次剂量。将观察数据与用药图表进行比较,以找出错误。对临床错误、潜在严重性和实际伤害进行了评估。研究还收集了护士的特征(如年龄、性别、经验)、用药类型(途径、高风险药物、溶媒/稀释剂的使用)和工作变量(如用药时间、工作日/周末、电子用药管理系统 [eMM]的使用、家长/看护人的存在)。结果37.0%(n = 1899;95% 置信区间 [CI] 35.7-38.3)的给药过程中出现了错误,其中25.8%(n = 489;95% CI 23.8-27.9)的错误被评为潜在严重错误。静脉输液和注射的错误率较高(分别为 64.7% [n = 514],95% CI 61.3-68.0;和 77.4% [n = 188],95% CI 71.7-82.2)。在静脉注射方面,59.7%(95% CI 53.4-65.6)存在潜在的严重错误。没有任何护士特征与 MAEs 相关。静脉注射途径、清晨和周末给药、患者年龄≥11岁、口服药物需要溶剂/稀释剂以及使用电子镇痛药都是重要的风险因素。与纸质病历相比,使用电子医疗备忘录造成实际伤害的 MAE 降低了 45%。应关注护士的工作环境,包括改进设计和整合用药技术。
Risk Factors Associated with Medication Administration Errors in Children: A Prospective Direct Observational Study of Paediatric Inpatients
Introduction
Limited evidence exists regarding medication administration errors (MAEs) on general paediatric wards or associated risk factors exists.
Objective
The aim of this study was to identify nurse, medication, and work-environment factors associated with MAEs among paediatric inpatients.
Methods
This was a prospective, direct observational study of 298 nurses in a paediatric referral hospital in Sydney, Australia. Trained observers recorded details of 5137 doses prepared and administered to 1530 children between 07:00 h and 22:00 h on weekdays and weekends. Observation data were compared with medication charts to identify errors. Clinical errors, potential severity and actual harm were assessed. Nurse characteristics (e.g. age, sex, experience), medication type (route, high-risk medications, use of solvent/diluent), and work variables (e.g. time of administration, weekday/weekend, use of an electronic medication management system [eMM], presence of a parent/carer) were collected. Multivariable models assessed MAE risk factors for any error, errors by route, potentially serious errors, and errors involving high-risk medication or causing actual harm.
Results
Errors occurred in 37.0% (n = 1899; 95% confidence interval [CI] 35.7–38.3) of administrations, 25.8% (n = 489; 95% CI 23.8–27.9) of which were rated as potentially serious. Intravenous infusions and injections had high error rates (64.7% [n = 514], 95% CI 61.3–68.0; and 77.4% [n = 188], 95% CI 71.7–82.2, respectively). For intravenous injections, 59.7% (95% CI 53.4–65.6) had potentially serious errors. No nurse characteristics were associated with MAEs. Intravenous route, early morning and weekend administrations, patient age ≥ 11 years, oral medications requiring solvents/diluents and eMM use were all significant risk factors. MAEs causing actual harm were 45% lower using an eMM compared with paper charts.
Conclusion
Medication error prevention strategies should target intravenous administrations and not neglect older children in hospital. Attention to nurses’ work environments, including improved design and integration of medication technologies, is warranted.
期刊介绍:
Drug Safety is the official journal of the International Society of Pharmacovigilance. The journal includes:
Overviews of contentious or emerging issues.
Comprehensive narrative reviews that provide an authoritative source of information on epidemiology, clinical features, prevention and management of adverse effects of individual drugs and drug classes.
In-depth benefit-risk assessment of adverse effect and efficacy data for a drug in a defined therapeutic area.
Systematic reviews (with or without meta-analyses) that collate empirical evidence to answer a specific research question, using explicit, systematic methods as outlined by the PRISMA statement.
Original research articles reporting the results of well-designed studies in disciplines such as pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacovigilance, pharmacology and toxicology, and pharmacogenomics.
Editorials and commentaries on topical issues.
Additional digital features (including animated abstracts, video abstracts, slide decks, audio slides, instructional videos, infographics, podcasts and animations) can be published with articles; these are designed to increase the visibility, readership and educational value of the journal’s content. In addition, articles published in Drug Safety Drugs may be accompanied by plain language summaries to assist readers who have some knowledge of, but not in-depth expertise in, the area to understand important medical advances.