Spreading a medication administration intervention organizationwide in six hospitals

Interruptions in Health Care: Assessing Their Connection With Error and Patient Harm

OBJECTIVE

We address the problem of how researchers investigate the actual or potential causal connection between interruptions and medical errors, and whether interventions might reduce the potential for harm.

BACKGROUND

It is widely assumed that interruptions lead to errors and patient harm. However, many reviewers and authors have commented that there is not strong evidence for a causal connection.

METHOD

We introduce a framework of criteria for assessing how strongly evidence implies causality: the so-called Bradford Hill criteria. We then examine four key "metanarratives" of research into interruptions in health care-applied cognitive psychology, epidemiology, quality improvement, and cognitive systems engineering-and assess how each tradition has addressed the causal connection between interruptions and error.

RESULTS

Outcomes of applying the Bradford Hill criteria are that the applied cognitive psychology and epidemiology metanarratives address the causal connection relatively directly, whereas the quality improvement metanarrative merely assumes causality, and the cognitive systems engineering metanarrative either implicitly or explicitly questions the feasibility of finding a direct causal connection with harm.

CONCLUSION

The Bradford Hill criteria are useful for evaluating the existing literature on the relationship between interruptions in health care, clinical errors, and the potential for patient harm. In the future, more attention is needed to the issue of why interruptions usually do not lead to harm, and the implications for how we approach patient safety.

Effectiveness of a 'Do not interrupt' bundled intervention to reduce interruptions during medication administration: a cluster randomised controlled feasibility study

Aim

To evaluate the effectiveness of a ‘Do not interrupt’ bundled intervention to reduce non-medication-related interruptions to nurses during medication administration.

Methods

A parallel eight cluster randomised controlled study was conducted in a major teaching hospital in Adelaide, Australia. Four wards were randomised to the intervention which comprised wearing a vest when administering medications; strategies for diverting interruptions; clinician and patient education; and reminders. Control wards were blinded to the intervention. Structured direct observations of medication administration processes were conducted. The primary outcome was non-medication-related interruptions during individual medication dose administrations. The secondary outcomes were total interruption and multitasking rates. A survey of nurses' experiences was administered.

Results

Over 8 weeks and 364.7 hours, 227 nurses were observed administering 4781 medications. At baseline, nurses experienced 57 interruptions/100 administrations, 87.9% were unrelated to the medication task being observed. Intervention wards experienced a significant reduction in non-medication-related interruptions from 50/100 administrations (95% CI 45 to 55) to 34/100 (95% CI 30 to 38). Controlling for clustering, ward type and medication route showed a significant reduction of 15 non-medication-related interruptions/100 administrations compared with control wards. A total of 88 nurses (38.8%) completed the poststudy survey. Intervention ward nurses reported that vests were time consuming, cumbersome and hot. Only 48% indicated that they would support the intervention becoming hospital policy.

Discussion

Nurses experienced a high rate of interruptions. Few were related to the medication task, demonstrating considerable scope to reduce unnecessary interruptions. While the intervention was associated with a statistically significant decline in non-medication-related interruptions, the magnitude of this reduction and its likely impact on error rates should be considered, relative to the effectiveness of alternate interventions, associated costs, likely acceptability and long-term sustainability of such interventions.

Effectiveness of an improvement programme to prevent interruptions during medication administration in a paediatric hospital: a preintervention-postintervention study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of an improvement programme to reduce the number of interruptions during the medication administration process in a paediatric hospital.

DESIGN AND METHODS

A prestudy-post study design was used to monitor nursing interruptions during medication cycles in a paediatric hospital. Interruptions were reported on an observation sheet (MADOS-P) adapted to the paediatric context.

SETTING

A 600-bed tertiary paediatric research hospital in Italy.

INTERVENTION

The interventions included a yellow sash worn by nurses during medication cycles, a yellow-taped floor area indicating the 'No interruption area', visual notices in the medication areas, education sessions for healthcare providers and families, patient and parent information material.

RESULTS

225 medication cycles were observed before the intervention (T0) and 261 after the intervention (T1). The median of interruptions occurring in each cycle decreased significantly from baseline to postintervention (8.0 vs 2.0, p=0.002), as the rate ratios (interruptions/patient post-pre ratio: 0.34; interruptions/medication post-pre ratio: 0.37; interruptions/hour of medication cycle post-pre ratio: 0.53, p<0.001). During preintervention, the main causes of interruptions were 'other patients' (19.9%), 'other nurses' (17.2%) and 'conversation' (15.7%); during postintervention, they were 'other nurses' (26.1%), 'conversation' (18.2%) and 'other patients' (17.4%).

CONCLUSIONS

This bundle of interventions proved to be an effective improvement programme to prevent interruptions during medication administration in a paediatric context.

Traditions of research into interruptions in healthcare: A conceptual review

BACKGROUND

Researchers from diverse theoretical backgrounds have studied workplace interruptions in healthcare, leading to a complex and conflicting body of literature. Understanding pre-existing viewpoints may advance the field more effectively than attempts to remove bias from investigations.

OBJECTIVE

To identify research traditions that have motivated and guided interruptions research, and to note research questions posed, gaps in approach, and possible avenues for future research.

METHODS

A critical review was conducted of research on interruptions in healthcare. Two researchers identified core research communities based on the community's motivations, philosophical outlook, and methods. Among the characteristics used to categorise papers into research communities were the predominant motivation for studying interruptions, the research questions posed, and key contributions to the body of knowledge on interruptions in healthcare. In cases where a paper approached an equal number of characteristics from two traditions, it was placed in a blended research community.

RESULTS

A total of 141 papers were identified and categorised; all papers identified were published from 1994 onwards. Four principal research communities emerged: epidemiology, quality improvement, cognitive systems engineering (CSE), and applied cognitive psychology. Blends and areas of mutual influence between the research communities were identified that combine the benefits of individual traditions, but there was a notable lack of blends incorporating quality improvement initiatives. The question most commonly posed by researchers across multiple communities was: what is the impact of interruptions? Impact was measured as a function of task time or risk in the epidemiology tradition, situation awareness in the CSE tradition, or resumption lag (time to resume an interrupted task) in the applied cognitive psychology tradition. No single question about interruptions in healthcare was shared by all four of the core communities.

CONCLUSIONS

Much research on workplace interruptions in healthcare can be described in terms of fundamental values of four distinct research traditions and the communities that bring the values and methods: of those research traditions to their investigations. Blends between communities indicate that mutual influence has occurred as interruptions research has progressed. It is clear from this review that there is no single or privileged perspective to study interruptions. Instead, these findings suggest that researchers investigating interruptions in healthcare would benefit from being more aware of different perspectives from their own, especially when they consider workplace interventions to reduce interruptions.

Using the integrated nurse leadership program to reduce sepsis mortality

BACKGROUND

The Integrated Nurse Leadership Program (INLP) is a collaborative improvement model focused on developing practical leadership skills of nurses and other frontline clinicians to lead quality improvement efforts. Sepsis is a major challenge to treat because it arises unpredictably and can progress rapidly. Nine San Francisco Bay Area hospitals participated in a 22-month INLP Sepsis Mortality Reduction Project to improve sepsis detection and management.

METHODS

The INLP focused on developing leadership and process improvement skills of nurses and other frontline clinicians. Teams of trained clinicians then implemented three strategies to improve early identification and timely treatment of sepsis: (1) sepsis screening of all patients, with diagnostic testing according to protocol; (2) timely treatment on the basis of key elements of Early Goal-Directed Therapy (EGDT); and (3) ongoing data review. Each hospital agreed to pursue the goal of reducing sepsis mortality by 15% by the end of the project.

RESULTS

In the data collection period (baseline, July-December 2008 and project completion, January-June 2011), team members showed strong improvement in perceived leadership skills, team effectiveness, and ability to improve care quality. During this period, sepsis mortality for eight of the participating hospitals (Hospital 9 joined the project six months after it began) decreased by 43.7%-from 28% in the baseline period to 16% at project completion. Sepsis mortality rates trended downward for all hospitals, significantly decreasing (p<.05 at one hospital, p<.01 for four hospitals).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to improvement in safety culture and management of septic patients, hospitals participating in the INLP Sepsis Mortality Reduction Project achieved reductions in sepsis mortality during the study period and sustained reductions for more than one year later. The INLP model can be readily applied beyond sepsis management and mortality to other quality problems.

Are interventions to reduce interruptions and errors during medication administration effective?: a systematic review

Background

Medication administration errors are frequent and lead to patient harm. Interruptions during medication administration have been implicated as a potential contributory factor.

Objective

To assess evidence of the effectiveness of interventions aimed at reducing interruptions during medication administration on interruption and medication administration error rates.

Methods

In September 2012 we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Cochrane Effective Practice and Organisation of Care Group reviews, Google and Google Scholar, and hand searched references of included articles. Intervention studies reporting quantitative data based on direct observations of at least one outcome (interruptions, or medication administration errors) were included.

Results

Ten studies, eight from North America and two from Europe, met the inclusion criteria. Five measured significant changes in interruption rates pre and post interventions. Four found a significant reduction and one an increase. Three studies measured changes in medication administration error rates and showed reductions, but all implemented multiple interventions beyond those targeted at reducing interruptions. No study used a controlled design pre and post. Definitions for key outcome indicators were reported in only four studies. Only one study reported κ scores for inter-rater reliability and none of the multi-ward studies accounted for clustering in their analyses.

Conclusions

There is weak evidence of the effectiveness of interventions to significantly reduce interruption rates and very limited evidence of their effectiveness to reduce medication administration errors. Policy makers should proceed with great caution in implementing such interventions until controlled trials confirm their value. Research is also required to better understand the complex relationship between interruptions and error to support intervention design.