Arterial line blood sampling: preventing hypoglycaemic brain injury 2014

Adverse events with arterial catheters in intensive care units: a scoping review

INTRODUCTION

The installation of an arterial line is one of the invasive procedures performed for hemodynamic monitoring and, even with its clear importance in intensive care, it is still an invasive procedure and liable to cause harms to the patients.

OBJECTIVE

To identify the adverse events associated with the use of arterial catheters in critically-ill patients in the world scientific production.

METHODOLOGY

The present scoping review was conducted according to the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) checklist was used for reporting. The research question was "Which adverse events related to the use of arterial catheters in patients admitted to intensive care are more evident in the literature?". Data collection took place in the following databases: LILACS; MEDLINE; EMBASE; CINAHL, EBSCOhost; and WEB OF SCIENCE.

RESULTS

Through the search strategies, 491 articles were found in the databases. After exclusion of duplicates, peer analysis of titles and abstracts, full reading and screening of lists of references, the final sample of studies included was 38 articles. The main harms cited by the publications were as follows: limb ischemia, thrombosis, hemorrhage, accidental removal, inadvertent connection of inadequate infusion solution, pseudoaneurysm and bloodstream infection.

CONCLUSIONS

It was evidenced that patients are subjected to risks of adverse events from the insertion moment to removal of the arterial catheter, focusing on the infusion solution used to fill the circuit, the type of securement and dressings chosen, as well as the Nursing care measures for the prevention of bloodstream infection.

Reminding staff of diligence during the medication process is not enough to ensure safety: Learning from wrong fluid product selection incidents in the care of critically ill patients

Background and objectives

Wrong fluid product selection may cause harm to patients. This study aimed to describe voluntarily reported wrong fluid product selection incidents, including their consequences, the reported latent conditions and active failures leading to these and the suggested safeguards to prevent their occurrence, and to compare the suggested and literature-based safeguards to improve the fluid therapy safety within the intensive care (ICU) environment.

Methods

All voluntarily and anonymously reported wrong fluid product selection incidents in all Finnish ICUs during 2007–2017 were reviewed. The incident reports included categorized data that were analyzed quantitatively, and narratives that were analyzed qualitatively, using content analysis. The results were reported as frequencies and percentages and described by using Reason's model of human error.

Results

Over the eleven years, one wrong fluid product selection incident was reported every six days (n = 663; 584 errors, 79 near misses); most were reported to have occurred during the dispensing/preparing phase (92%). Of the 584 reported selection errors, a quarter (26%) was reported to have caused consequences to patients, and one third (35%) to have required corrective or monitoring actions. The main reported latent conditions to the incidents were Working environment and resources (e.g. workload and time pressure) (29%), Similar-looking and -sounding names or shared features of the product containers (i.e. the LASA phenomenon) (28%) and Working methods (22%); and the main reported active failures were a lack of concentration, or forgetfulness (26%). Some usable suggestions of safeguards were made, e.g. optimizing fluid storage (15%) or utilizing checking practices (21%). While requiring accuracy, i.e. reminding staff of diligence and to be more attentive to detail during the whole medication process, was emphasized in most reports (71%), involving manufacturers in redesigning labels of fluid products, utilizing technology and strengthening pharmacy services are advocated existing literature.

Conclusions

Wrong fluid product selection incidents with various latent conditions and active failures were reported more than once a week. To minimize the serious LASA phenomenon, multi-professional collaboration, coordinated international discussion and agreements of solutions with manufacturers, regulators and end-users, are needed. However, work is also needed to reduce the other latent factors, such as Working environment and resources as well as cognitive biases in daily work that may contribute to the occurrence of LASA related errors.

An integrative review of method types used in the study of medication error during anaesthesia: implications for estimating incidence

To meet the WHO vision of reducing medication errors by 50%, it is essential to know the current error rate. We undertook an integrative review of the literature, using a systematic search strategy. We included studies that provided an estimate of error rate (i.e. both numerator and denominator data), regardless of type of study (e.g. RCT or observational study). Under each method type, we categorised the error rate by type, by classification used by the primary studies (e.g. wrong drug, wrong dose, wrong time), and then pooled numerator and denominator data across studies to obtain an aggregate error rate for each method type. We included a total of 30 studies in this review. Of these, two studies were national audit projects containing relevant data, and for 28 studies we identified five discrete method types: retrospective recall (6), self-reporting (7), observational (5), large databases (7), and observing for drug calculation errors (3). Of these 28 studies we included 22 for a numerical analysis and used six to inform a narrative review. Drug error is recalled by ~1 in 5 anaesthetists as something that happened over their career; in self-reports there is an admitted rate of ~1 in 200 anaesthetics. In observed practice, error is seen in almost every anaesthetic. In large databases, drug error constitutes ~10% of anaesthesia incidents reported. Wrong drug or dose form the most common type of error across all five study method types (especially dosing error in paediatric studies). We conclude that medication error is common in anaesthetic practice, although we were uncertain of the precise frequency or extent of harm. Studies concerning medication error are very heterogenous, and we recommend consideration of standardised reporting as in other research domains.

The glucose error in arterial sampling: assessing staff awareness and the effect of sampling technique*

Background

Using a dextrose-containing solution, instead of normal saline, to maintain the patency of an arterial cannula results in the admixture of glucose in line samples. This can misguide the clinician down an inappropriate treatment pathway for hyperglycaemia.

Methods

Following a near-miss and subsequent educational and training efforts at our institution, we conducted two simulations: (1) to observe whether 20 staff would identify a 5% dextrose/0.9% saline flush solution as the cause for a patient’s refractory hyperglycaemia, and (2) to compare different arterial line sampling techniques for glucose contamination.

Results

(1) Only 2/20 participants identified the incorrect dextrose-containing flush solution, with the remainder choosing to escalate insulin therapy to levels likely to risk fatality, and (2) glucose contamination occurred regardless of sampling technique.

Conclusion

Despite national guidance and local educational efforts, this is still an under-recognised error. Operator-focussed preventative strategies have not been effective and an engineered solution is needed.

Finding a solution: Heparinised saline versus normal saline in the maintenance of invasive arterial lines in intensive care

BACKGROUND

We assessed the impact of heparinised saline versus 0.9% normal saline on arterial line patency. Maintaining the patency of arterial lines is essential for obtaining accurate physiological measurements, enabling blood sampling and minimising line replacement. Use of heparinised saline is associated with risks such as thrombocytopenia, haemorrhage and mis-selection. Historical studies draw variable conclusions but suggest that normal saline is at least as effective at maintaining line patency, although recent evidence has questioned this.

METHODS

We conducted a prospective analysis of the use of heparinised saline versus normal saline on unselected patients in the intensive care of our hospital. Data concerning duration of 471 lines insertion and reason for removal was collected.

RESULTS

We found a higher risk of blockage for lines flushed with normal saline compared with heparinised saline (RR = 2.15, 95% CI 1.392-3.32, p ≤ 0.001). Of the 56 lines which blocked initially (19 heparinised saline and 37 normal saline lines), 16 were replaced with new lines; 5 heparinised saline lines and 11 normal saline lines were reinserted; 5 of these lines subsequently blocked again, 3 of which were flushed with normal saline.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study demonstrates a clinically important reduction in arterial line longevity due to blockages when flushed with normal saline compared to heparinised saline. We have determined that these excess blockages have a significant clinical impact with further lines being inserted after blockage, resulting in increased risks to patients, wasted time and cost of resources. Our findings suggest that the current UK guidance favouring normal saline flushes should be reviewed.

Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland: Safe vascular access 2016

Safe vascular access is integral to anaesthetic and critical care practice, but procedures are a frequent source of patient adverse events. Ensuring safe and effective approaches to vascular catheter insertion should be a priority for all practitioners. New technology such as ultrasound and other imaging has increased the number of tools available. This guidance was created using review of current practice and literature, as well as expert opinion. The result is a consensus document which provides practical advice on the safe insertion and removal of vascular access devices.

The effect of hyperglycaemia on haemostasis testing--a volunteer study

We investigated whether the contamination of samples with glucose subsequently tested for haemostasis affected the results, including prothrombin time, activated partial thromboplastin time and fibrinogen concentration. Venous blood was collected from 12 healthy subjects and divided into four aliquots, which were subjected to different degrees of contamination with standard glucose solution (0%, 5%, 10%, 20%). With increasing glucose contamination, prothrombin time increased from mean (SD) 11.0 (0.7) s to 11.2 (0.7) s, 11.5 (0.7) s and 12.2 (0.8) s, all p < 0.001. Activated partial thromboplastin time decreased from 32.3 (0.9) s to 30.9 (0.8) s, 30.8 (0.8) s, and 29.7 (0.7) s, all p < 0.001. Fibrinogen concentration decreased from 3.8 (0.7) g.l(-1) to 3.7 (0.6) g.l(-1), 3.6 (0.6) g.l(-1), and 3.4 (0.6) g.l(-1), all p < 0.001. Bias was clinically meaningful from 5% contamination for activated partial thromboplastin time, 10% contamination for prothrombin time and 20% contamination for fibrinogen concentration. We conclude that if glucose contamination of haemostasis samples is suspected or has occurred, the specimens should not be analysed.

An analysis of patient safety incidents associated with medications reported from critical care units in the North West of England between 2009 and 2012

Incident reporting is promoted as a key tool for improving patient safety in healthcare. We analysed 2238 patient safety incidents involving medications submitted from up to 29 critical care units each year in the North West of England between 2009 and 2012; 452 (20%) of these incidents led to harm to patients. Although 1461 (65%) incidents were judged to have been preventable, there was no reduction in the rate of incidents per 1000 days between 2009 and 2012 (5.9 in 2009, 6.6 in 2012). Furthermore, in the 2012 data, there were wide variations in the incident rates between units, the median (IQR [range]) rate per 1000 patient days for individual units being 6.8 (3.8-11.0 [1.3-37.1]). The variation in the percentage that could have been avoided was narrower, with a median (IQR [range]) of 70% (61-80% [38-100%]). The most commonly reported drugs were noradrenaline (161 incidents, 92 with harm), heparins (153 incidents, 29 with harm), morphine (131 incidents, 14 with harm) and insulin (111 incidents, 54 with harm). The administration of drugs was the stage in the process where incidents were most commonly reported; it was also the stage most likely to harm patients. We conclude that the wide range in reported rates between units, and the scope for preventing many incidents, suggest that quality improvement initiatives could improve medication safety in the units studied.