Reducing Errors During Patient-Controlled Analgesia Therapy Through Failure Mode and Effects Analysis

Failure mode and effects analysis for proactive healthcare risk evaluation: A systematic literature review

RATIONALE, AIMS, AND OBJECTIVES

Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA) is a valuable reliability management tool that can preemptively identify the potential failures of a system and assess their causes and effects, thereby preventing them from occurring. The use of FMEA in the healthcare setting has become increasingly popular over the last decade, being applied to a multitude of different areas. The objective of this study is to review comprehensively the literature regarding the application of FMEA for healthcare risk analysis.

METHODS

An extensive search was carried out in the scholarly databases of Scopus and PubMed, and we only chose the academic articles which used the FMEA technique to solve healthcare risk analysis problems. Furthermore, a bibliometric analysis was performed based on the number of citations, publication year, appeared journals, authors, and country of origin.

RESULTS

A total of 158 journal papers published over the period of 1998 to 2018 were extracted and reviewed. These publications were classified into four categories (ie, healthcare process, hospital management, hospital informatization, and medical equipment and production) according to the healthcare issues to be solved, and analyzed regarding the application fields and the utilized FMEA methods.

CONCLUSION

FMEA has high practicality for healthcare quality improvement and error reduction and has been prevalently employed to improve healthcare processes in hospitals. This research supports academics and practitioners in effectively adopting the FMEA tool to proactively reduce healthcare risks and increase patient safety, and provides an insight into its state-of-the-art.

Real-world use of the sufentanil sublingual tablet system for patient-controlled management of acute postoperative pain: a prospective noninterventional study

Objective: To evaluate the real-life effectiveness, safety, tolerability and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) of the sufentanil sublingual tablet system (SSTS) for postoperative pain management (POPM).Methods: This prospective, multicenter, noninterventional, study included adults with acute moderate to severe postoperative pain who self-administered sufentanil using the SSTS. Main outcome measures were pain intensity at rest (numerical rating scale [NRS]: 0 [no pain] to 10 [most intense pain imaginable]); most intense pain intensity (0-10); 4-point patient assessment of the pain control method ("excellent", "good", "fair", "poor"); patient satisfaction with the pain control level and the method of administration of pain medication (6-point scale: "extremely satisfied", "very satisfied", "satisfied", "dissatisfied", "very dissatisfied", "extremely dissatisfied"). Adverse drug reactions were recorded.Results: The SSTS reduced resting pain intensity in patients (n = 341) from a mean ± SD NRS score of 5.2 ± 2.3 (at SSTS handover) to 1.8 ± 1.6 (3rd day after handover). The proportion of patients with severe pain (for the PRO measure "most intense pain") decreased steadily during the 72 hours of treatment. Overall, 87.1% of the patients reported the method of pain control to be "good" or "excellent"; 91.8% reported being "extremely/very satisfied" or "satisfied" with the level of pain control; and 95.9% were at least satisfied with the method of pain medication administration. SSTS safety and tolerability was typical for opioids and as described in the SSTS Summary of Product Characteristics.Conclusions: The SSTS is a valuable option for real-life POPM and is effective in a wide range of surgical procedures.

Impact of Patient-Controlled Analgesia (PCA) Smart Pump-Electronic Health Record (EHR) Interoperability with Auto-Documentation on Chart Completion in a Community Hospital Setting

INTRODUCTION

Complete and accurate documentation of opioids administered by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pumps is critical for ensuring a high-quality medication record and an accurate conversion of the intravenous (IV) regimen to oral therapy. Incomplete charting of PCA usage through a manual process may be associated with fragmented documentation of delivered therapy affecting the completeness of the medical record and the IV to oral dose conversion. This study is the first to evaluate the association between auto-documentation of opioid administration provided by PCA smart pump-electronic health record (EHR) interoperability and the completion of PCA opioid administration charting tasks.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted at Lancaster General Hospital, Lancaster, Pennsylvania. Patients were assigned to pre-auto-documentation (n = 55) or post-auto-documentation groups (n = 58) based on whether they received PCA therapy prior to or after PCA-EHR interoperability was implemented. Charting of PCA therapy included documentation of the number of patient attempts, number of doses given, and total volume infused for both pre- and post-auto-documentation groups. In addition, total dose delivered was documented for the post-auto-documentation group. The overall chart-field completion rate was evaluated as the primary outcome. Individual chart completion percentages were assessed by stratified groups as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

PCA smart pump-EHR interoperability with auto-documentation was associated with an increase in overall chart-field completion rate from 69.9 to 97.0% (p < 0.001). Auto-documentation was also associated with an increase in fully completed charts from 38 to 91% (139.3% increase, p < 0.001) and reductions of incomplete records in each stratified group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

PCA smart pump-EHR interoperability with auto-documentation is associated with significant improvements in the completion of opioid administration chart-fields. Improved documentation of PCA administered opioids may have implications for the safety of opioid administration. Additional studies will be needed to assess the potential clinical impact of these results.

FUNDING

ICU Medical, Inc.

Mapping outcomes in quality improvement and system design activities: the outcome identification loop and system impact model

Background

Whether explicit or implicit, models of value are fundamental in quality improvement (QI) initiatives. They embody the desirability of the impact of interventions—with either foresight or hindsight. Increasingly impact is articulated in terms of outcomes, which are often prescribed and sometimes inappropriate. Currently, there is little methodological guidance for deriving an appropriate set of outcomes for a given QI initiative. This paper describes a structured approach for identifying and mapping outcomes.

Overall approach

Central to the approach presented here is the engagement of teams in the exploration of the system that is being designed into. This methodology has emerged from the analysis and abstraction of existing methods that define systems in terms of outcomes, stakeholders and their analogues. It is based on a sequence of questions that underpin these methods.

Outcome elicitation tools

The fundamental questions of outcome elicitation can be concatenated into a structured process, within the Outcome Identification Loop. This system-analysis process stimulates new insights that can be captured within a System Impact Model.

The System Impact Model reconciles principles of intended cause/effect, with knowledge of unintended effects more typically emphasised by risk approaches. This system representation may be used to select sets of outcomes that signify the greatest impact on patients, staff and other stakeholders. It may also be used to identify potential QI interventions and to forecast their impact.

Discussion and conclusions

The Outcome Identification Loop has proven to be an effective tool for designing workshops and interviews that engage stakeholders, critically in the early stages of QI planning. By applying this process in different ways, existing knowledge is captured in System Impact Models and mobilised towards QI endeavours.

Hazards and incidents: Detection and learning in radiation medicine, a comparison of 2 educational interventions

PURPOSE

Interprofessional, educational live simulations were compared with group discussion-based exercises in terms of their ability to improve radiation medicine trainees' ability to detect hazards and incidents and understand behaviors that may prevent them.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

Trainees and recent graduates of radiation therapy, medical physics, and radiation oncology programs were recruited and randomized to either a simulation-based or group discussion-based training intervention. Participants engaged in hazard and incident detection, analysis, and a discussion of potential preventive measures and the concept of the "highly reliable team." A video examination tool modeled on actual incidents, using 5-minute videos created by faculty, students, and volunteers, was created to test hazard and incident recognition ability before and after training. Hazard and incident detection sensitivity and specificity analyses were conducted, and a survey of the participants' and facilitators' perceptions was conducted.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven participants were assigned to the simulation (n = 15) or discussion group (n = 12). Hazard and incident-detection sensitivity ranged from 0.04 to 0.56 before and 0.04 to 0.35 after training for the discussion and simulation groups, respectively. The pre- and posttraining difference in sensitivity between groups was 0.03 (P = .75) for the minimum and 0.33 (P = .034) for the maximum reaction time. Participant perceptions of the training's educational value in a variety of domains ranged from a mean score of 6.58 to 8.17 and 7 to 8.07 for the discussion and simulation groups, respectively. Differences were not statistically significant. Twenty-six of the 27 participants indicated that they would recommend this event to a colleague.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants' ability to detect hazards and incidents as portrayed in 5-minute videos in this study was low both before and after training, and simulation-based training was not superior to discussion-based training. However, levels of satisfaction and perceptions of the training's educational value were high, especially with simulation-based training.

The efficacy of elastomeric patient-control module when connected to a balloon pump for postoperative epidural analgesia: A randomized, noninferiority trial

When considering the principles of a pain control strategy by patients, reliable administration of additional bolus doses is important for providing the adequate analgesia and improving patient satisfaction. We compared the efficacy of elastomeric patient-control module (PCM) with conventional PCM providing epidural analgesia postoperatively.A noninferiority comparison was used. Eighty-six patients scheduled for open upper abdominal surgery were randomized to use either an elastomeric or conventional PCM connected to balloon pump. After successful epidural catheter insertion at T6-8 level, fentanyl (15-20 μg/kg) in 0.3% ropivacaine 100 mL was administered at basal rate 2 mL/h with bolus 2 mL and lock-out time 15 minutes. The primary outcome was the verbal numerical rating score for pain.The 95% confidence intervals for differences in pain scores during the first 48 hours postoperatively were <1, indicating noninferiority of the elastomeric PCM. The duration of pump reservoir exhaustion was shorter for the elastomeric PCM (mean [SD], 33 hours [8 hours] vs 40 hours [8 hours], P = 0.0003). There were no differences in the frequency of PCM use, additional analgesics, or adverse events between groups.The elastomeric PCM was as effective as conventional PCM with and exhibited a similar safety profile.

Sufentanil sublingual formulation for the treatment of acute, moderate to severe postoperative pain in adult patients

INTRODUCTION

Sufentanil is a highly selective µ-opioid agonist commonly used by intravenous and intrathecal routes for acute pain. Sublingual sufentanil formulation for patient controlled analgesia (PCA) uses an innovative administration device that suspends a 15 µg nanotablet with a fixed lockout interval. The system is a non-invasive, less burdensome method of opioid delivery compared to intravenous and intrathecal routes. Sublingual nanotablet PCA transmucosal bioavailability is 59% and the meaningful analgesic onset time is 60 minutes. Areas covered: This paper focuses on the effectiveness, safety and feasibility of sufentanil PCA sublingual formulation for the management of postoperative pain. The paper is based on PubMed searches and the European Medicine Agency assessment report. Expert commentary: Under-treatment of acute pain is a substantial clinical problem. The initial experiences with the sublingual delivery system are encouraging. Sufentanil sublingual nanotablets intended for PCA device use are approved in Europe, and approval is pending in the United States.

Management strategies to effect change in intensive care units: lessons from the world of business. Part I. Targeting quality improvement initiatives

The business community has developed strategies to ensure the quality of the goods or services they produce and to improve the management of multidisciplinary work teams. With modification, many of these techniques can be imported into intensive care units (ICUs) to improve clinical operations and patient safety. In Part I of a three-part ATS Seminar series, we argue for adopting business management strategies in ICUs and set forth strategies for targeting selected quality improvement initiatives. These tools are relevant to health care today as focus is placed on limiting low-value care and measuring, reporting, and improving quality. In the ICU, the complexity of illness and the need to standardize processes make these tools even more appealing. Herein, we highlight four techniques to help prioritize initiatives. First, the "80/20 rule" mandates focus on the few (20%) interventions likely to drive the majority (80%) of improvement. Second, benchmarking--a process of comparison with peer units or institutions--is essential to identifying areas of strength and weakness. Third, root cause analyses, in which structured retrospective reviews of negative events are performed, can be used to identify and fix systems errors. Finally, failure mode and effects analysis--a process aimed at prospectively identifying potential sources of error--allows for systems fixes to be instituted in advance to prevent negative outcomes. These techniques originated in fields other than health care, yet adoption has and can help ICU managers prioritize issues for quality improvement.

RISKS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION AND USE OF SMART PUMPS IN A PEDIATRIC INTENSIVE CARE UNIT: APPLICATION OF THE FAILURE MODE AND EFFECTS ANALYSIS

Objectives: The aim of this study was to identify risk points in the different stages of the smart infusion pump implementation process to prioritize improvement measures.

Methods: Failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a General and Teaching Hospital. A multidisciplinary team was comprised of two intensive care pediatricians, two clinical pharmacists and the PICU nurse manager. FMEA was carried out before implementing CareFusion infusion smart pumps and eighteen months after to identify risk points during three different stages of the implementation process: creating a drug library; using the technology during clinical practice and analyzing the data stored using Guardrails® CQI v4.1 Event Reporter software.

Results: Several actions for improvement were taken. These included carrying out periodical reviews of the drug library, developing support documents, and including a training profile in the system so that alarms set off by real programming errors could be distinguished from those caused by incorrect use of the system. Eighteen months after the implementation, these measures had helped to reduce the likelihood of each risk point occurring and increase the likelihood of their detection.

Conclusions: Carrying out an FMEA made it possible to detect risk points in the use of smart pumps, take action to improve the tool, and adapt it to the PICU. Providing user training and support tools and continuously monitoring results helped to improve the usefulness of the drug library, increased users’ compliance with the drug library, and decreased the number of unnecessary alarms.

Safeguarding the process of drug administration with an emphasis on electronic support tools

AIMS

The aim of this work is to understand the process of drug administration and identify points in the workflow that resulted in interventions by clinical information systems in order to improve patient safety.

METHODS

To identify a generic way to structure the drug administration process we performed peer-group discussions and supplemented these discussions with a literature search for studies reporting errors in drug administration and strategies for their prevention.

RESULTS

We concluded that the drug administration process might consist of up to 11 sub-steps, which can be grouped into the four sub-processes of preparation, personalization, application and follow-up. Errors in drug handling and administration are diverse and frequent and in many cases not caused by the patient him/herself, but by family members or nurses. Accordingly, different prevention strategies have been set in place with relatively few approaches involving e-health technology.

CONCLUSIONS

A generic structuring of the administration process and particular error-prone sub-steps may facilitate the allocation of prevention strategies and help to identify research gaps.

Safety strategies in an academic radiation oncology department and recommendations for action

BACKGROUND

Safety initiatives in the United States continue to work on providing guidance as to how the average practitioner might make patients safer in the face of the complex process by which radiation therapy (RT), an essential treatment used in the management of many patients with cancer, is prepared and delivered. Quality control measures can uncover certain specific errors such as machine dose miscalibration or misalignments of the patient in the radiation treatment beam. However, they are less effective at uncovering less common errors that can occur anywhere along the treatment planning and delivery process, and even when the process is functioning as intended, errors still occur. PRIORITIZING RISKS AND IMPLEMENTING RISK-REDUCTION STRATEGIES: Activities undertaken at the radiation oncology department at the Johns Hopkins Hospital (Baltimore) include Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA), risk-reduction interventions, and voluntary error and near-miss reporting systems. A visual process map portrayed 269 RT steps occurring among four subprocesses-including consult, simulation, treatment planning, and treatment delivery. Two FMEAs revealed 127 and 159 possible failure modes, respectively. Risk-reduction interventions for 15 "top-ranked" failure modes were implemented. Since the error and near-miss reporting system's implementation in the department in 2007, 253 events have been logged. However, the system may be insufficient for radiation oncology, for which a greater level of practice-specific information is required to fully understand each event.

CONCLUSIONS

The "basic science" of radiation treatment has received considerable support and attention in developing novel therapies to benefit patients. The time has come to apply the same focus and resources to ensuring that patients safely receive the maximal benefits possible.

Risk assessing risk assessment

If done well, proactive risk assessment methods can be effective in identifying and managing risks and still be efficient and rewarding for the participants. However, they can also fail, which suggests the potential usefulness of risk assessing the risk assessment process.