Strategies to reduce medication errors with reference to older adults

Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare professional or patient. Medication errors in hospitalised adults may cause harm, additional costs, and even death.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce medication errors in adults in hospital settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers on 16 January 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies investigating interventions aimed at reducing medication errors in hospitalised adults, compared with usual care or other interventions. Outcome measures included adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs, preventable ADEs, medication errors, mortality, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life and identified/solved discrepancies. We included any hospital setting, such as inpatient care units, outpatient care settings, and accident and emergency departments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Where necessary, we extracted and reanalysed ITS study data using piecewise linear regression, corrected for autocorrelation and seasonality, where possible.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 studies: 51 RCTs and 14 ITS studies, involving 110,875 participants. About half of trials gave rise to 'some concerns' for risk of bias during the randomisation process and one-third lacked blinding of outcome assessment. Most ITS studies presented low risk of bias. Most studies came from high-income countries or high-resource settings. Medication reconciliation -the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to the medications that the patient has been taking- was the most common type of intervention studied. Electronic prescribing systems, barcoding for correct administering of medications, organisational changes, feedback on medication errors, education of professionals and improved medication dispensing systems were other interventions studied. Medication reconciliation Low-certainty evidence suggests that medication reconciliation (MR) versus no-MR may reduce medication errors (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.74; 3 studies; n=379). Compared to no-MR, MR probably reduces ADEs (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.80; 3 studies, n=1336 ; moderate-certainty evidence), but has little to no effect on length of stay (mean difference (MD) -0.30 days, 95%CI -1.93 to 1.33 days; 3 studies, n=527) and quality of life (MD -1.51, 95%CI -10.04 to 7.02; 1 study, n=131).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may reduce medication errors (OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.48; 8 studies, n=2648) and may increase ADEs (OR 1.34, 95%CI 0.73 to 2.44; 3 studies, n=2873). Compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may have little to no effect on length of stay (MD -0.25, 95%CI -1.05 to 0.56; 6 studies, 3983). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that this intervention probably has little to no effect on mortality during hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.7; 2 studies, n=1000), and on readmissions at one month (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.14; 2 studies, n=997); and low-certainty evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on quality of life (MD 0.00, 95%CI -14.09 to 14.09; 1 study, n=724).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that database-assisted MR conducted by pharmacists, versus unassisted MR conducted by pharmacists, may reduce potential ADEs (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.64; 2 studies, n=3326), and may have no effect on length of stay (MD 1.00, 95%CI -0.17 to 2.17; 1 study, n=311).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR performed by trained pharmacist technicians, versus pharmacists, may have little to no difference on length of stay (MD -0.30, 95%CI -2.12 to 1.52; 1 study, n=183). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR before admission may increase the identification of discrepancies compared with MR after admission (MD 1.27, 95%CI 0.46 to 2.08; 1 study, n=307). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that multimodal interventions probably increase discrepancy resolutions compared to usual care (RR 2.14, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.53; 1 study, n=487). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE)/clinical decision support systems (CDSS) Moderate-certainty evidence shows that CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors compared to paper-based systems (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.31 to 1.79; 2 studies, n=88).  Moderate-certainty evidence shows that, compared with standard CPOE/CDSS, improved CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.97; 2 studies, n=630). Low-certainty evidence suggests that prioritised alerts provided by CPOE/CDSS may prevent ADEs compared to non-prioritised (inconsequential) alerts (MD 1.98, 95%CI 1.65 to 2.31; 1 study; participant numbers unavailable). Barcode identification of participants/medications Low-certainty evidence suggests that barcoding may reduce medication errors (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=50,545). Reduced working hours Low-certainty evidence suggests that reduced working hours may reduce serious medication errors (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63 to 1.09; 1 study, n=634). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Feedback on prescribing errors Low-certainty evidence suggests that feedback on prescribing errors may reduce medication errors (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, n=384). Dispensing system Low-certainty evidence suggests that dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=1775).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual care, medication reconciliation, CPOE/CDSS, barcoding, feedback and dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors and ADEs. However, the results are imprecise for some outcomes related to medication reconciliation and CPOE/CDSS. The evidence for other interventions is very uncertain. Powered and methodologically sound studies are needed to address the identified evidence gaps. Innovative, synergistic strategies -including those that involve patients- should also be evaluated.

How to Prevent or Reduce Prescribing Errors: An Evidence Brief for Policy

- Preventing prescribing errors is critical to improving patient safety.- We developed an evidence brief for policy to identify effective interventions to avoid or reduce prescribing errors.- Four options were raised: promoting educational actions on prudent prescribing directed to prescribers; incorporating computerized alert systems into clinical practice; implementing the use of tools for guiding medication prescribing; and, encouraging patient care by a multidisciplinary team, with the participation of a pharmacist.- These options can be incorporated into health systems either alone or together, and for that, it is necessary that the context be considered.- Aiming to inform decision makers, we included considerations on the implementation of these options regarding upper-middle income countries, like the Brazilian, and we also present considerations regarding equity.

Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines?

Objective:

To present a structured evaluation process that provides evidence that the single-checking (SC) system is not only a viable option in reducing medication errors, but also has the added advantage of increasing staff satisfaction.

Methods:

The structured evaluation involved one work improvement process and conducting a survey establishing registered nurses’ (RNs’) attitude toward SC of medicines. The survey questionnaire included 12 questions with a 5-point Likert scale.

Results:

In spite of the increased number of patients, the number of medication errors actually reduced (P < 0.001; two-sample test of proportions) with the implementation of SC of medication for competent and experienced staff. A survey was conducted to establish RNs’ attitudes toward SC of medicines 3 years post SC implementation. RNs viewed the single-nurse checking protocol positively. In particular, the nurses considered single-nurse checking as an encouragement to update their drug knowledge and as a time-saving measure, enhancing the quality of patient care. Nonetheless, they also expressed concerns on single-nurse checking.

Conclusions:

The findings provide evidence that SC system is a viable way to reducing medication errors and also confer the added advantage of staff satisfaction. Assuring quality and safety involves the need to challenge the status quo based on revealed evidence.

Fatigue-related risk management in the emergency department: a focus-group study

Fatigue has major implications on both patient safety and healthcare practitioner's well-being. Traditionally, two approaches can be used to reduce fatigue-related risk: reducing the likelihood of a fatigued operator working (i.e. fatigue reduction), or reducing the likelihood that a fatigued operator will make an error (i.e. fatigue proofing). Recent progress mainly focussed on fatigue reduction strategies such as reducing work hours. Yet it has to be recognized that such approach has not wholly overcome the experience of fatigue. Our purpose is to investigate individual proofing and reduction strategies used by emergency physicians to manage fatigue-related risk. 25 emergency physicians were recruited for the study. Four focus groups were formed which consisted of an average of six individuals. Qualitative data were collected using a semi-structured discussion guide unfolding in two parts. First, the participants were asked to describe how on-the-job fatigue affected their efficiency at work. A mind map was progressively drawn based upon the participants' perceived effects of fatigue. Second, participants were asked to describe any strategies they personally used to cope with these effects. We used inductive qualitative content analysis to reveal content themes for both fatigue effects and strategies. Emergency physicians reported 28 fatigue effects, 12 reduction strategies and 21 proofing strategies. Content analysis yielded a further classification of proofing strategies into self-regulation, task re-allocation and error monitoring strategies. There is significant potential for the development of more formal processes based on physicians' informal strategies.

Incidence, causes, and consequences of preventable adverse drug reactions occurring in inpatients: A systematic review of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND

Preventable adverse drug reactions (PADRs) in inpatients are associated with harm, including increased length of stay and potential loss of life, and result in elevated costs of care. We conducted an overview of reviews (i.e., a systematic review of systematic reviews) to determine the incidence of PADRs experienced by inpatients. Secondary review objectives were related to assessment of the effects of patient age, setting, and clinical specialty on PADR incidence.

METHODS

The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42016043220). We performed a search of Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, limiting languages of publication to English and French. We included published systematic reviews that reported quantitative data on the incidence of PADRs in patients receiving acute or ambulatory care in a hospital setting. The full texts of all primary studies for which PADR data were reported in the included reviews were obtained and data relevant to review objectives were extracted. Quality of the included reviews was assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool. Both narrative summaries of findings and meta-analyses of primary study data were undertaken.

RESULTS

Thirteen systematic reviews encompassing 37 unique primary studies were included. Across primary studies, the PADR incidence was highly varied, ranging from 0.006 to 13.3 PADRs per 100 patients, with a pooled incidence estimate of 0.59 PADRs per 100 patients. Substantial heterogeneity was present across both reviews and primary studies with respect to review/study objectives, patient age, hospital setting, medical discipline, definitions and assessment tools used, event detection methods, endpoints of interest, and units of measure. Thirteen primary studies used prospective event detection methods and had a pooled PADR incidence of 3.13 (2.87-3.38) PADRs per 100 patients; however, extreme statistical heterogeneity (I2 = 97%) indicated this finding should be considered with caution. Subgroup meta-analyses demonstrated that PADR incidence varied significantly with event detection method (prospective > retrospective > voluntary reporting methods), hospital setting (ICU > wards), and medical discipline (medical > surgical). High statistical heterogeneity (I2 > 80%) was present across all analyses, indicating results should be interpreted with caution. Effects of patient age could not be assessed due to poor reporting of age groups used in primary studies.

DISCUSSION

The method of event detection appeared to significantly influence PADR incidence, with prospective methods having the highest reported PADR rate. This finding is in agreement with the background literature. High methodological and statistical heterogeneity across primary studies evaluating adverse drug events reduces the validity of the overall PADR incidence derived from the meta-analyses of the pooled data. Data pooled from studies using only prospective methods of event detection should provide an overall estimate closest to the true PADR incidence; however, our estimate should be considered with caution due to the statistical heterogeneity found in this group of studies. Future studies should employ prospective methods of detection. This review demonstrates that the true overall incidence of PADRs is likely much greater than the overall pooled incidence estimate of 0.59 PADRs per 100 patients obtained when event detection method was not taken into consideration.

Care relationships at stake? Home healthcare professionals' experiences with digital medicine dispensers - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Although digital technologies can mitigate the burdens of home healthcare services caused by an ageing population that lives at home longer with complex health problems, research on the impacts and consequences of digitalised remote communication between patients and caregivers is lacking. The present study explores how home healthcare professionals had experienced the introduction of digital medicine dispensers and their influence on patient-caregiver relationships.

METHODS

The multi-case study comprised semi-structured interviews with 21 healthcare professionals whose home healthcare service involved using the digital medicine dispensers. The constant comparative method was used for data analyses.

RESULTS

Altogether, interviewed healthcare professionals reported three main technology-related impacts upon their patient-caregiver relationships. First, national and local pressure to increase efficiency had troubled their relationships with patients who suspected that municipalities have sought to lower costs by reducing and digitalising services. Participants reported having to consider such worries when introducing technologies into their services. Second, participants reported a shift towards empowering patients. Digital technology can empower patients who value their independence, whereas safety is more important for other patients. Healthcare professionals needed to ensure that replacing care tasks with technology implies safe and improved care. Third, the safety and quality of digital healthcare services continues to depend upon surveillance and control mechanisms that compensate for less face-to-face monitoring. Participants did not consider the possibility that surveillance exposes information about patients' everyday lives to be problematic, but to constitute opportunities for adjusting services to meet patients' needs.

CONCLUSIONS

Technologies such as digital medicine dispensers can improve the efficiency of healthcare services and enhance patients' independence when introduced in a way that empowers patients as well as safeguards trust and service quality. Conversely, the patient-caregiver relationship can suffer if the technology does not meet patients' needs and fails to offer safe and trustworthy services. Upon introducing technology, home healthcare professionals therefore need to carefully consider the benefits and possible disadvantages of the technology. Ethical implications for both individuals and societies need to be further discussed.

Impact of interventions designed to reduce medication administration errors in hospitals: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is a need to identify effective interventions to minimize the threat posed by medication administration errors (MAEs).

OBJECTIVE

Our objective was to review and critically appraise interventions designed to reduce MAEs in the hospital setting.

DATA SOURCES

Ten electronic databases were searched between 1985 and November 2013.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and controlled trials (CTs) reporting rates of MAEs or related adverse drug events between an intervention group and a comparator group were included. Data from each study were independently extracted and assessed for potential risk of bias by two authors. Risk ratios (RRs, with 95 % confidence intervals [CIs]) were used to examine the effect of an intervention.

RESULTS

Six RCTs and seven CTs were included. Types of interventions clustered around four main themes: medication use technology (n = 4); nurse education and training (n = 3); changing practice in anesthesia (n = 2); and ward system changes (n = 4). Reductions in MAE rates were reported by five studies; these included automated drug dispensing (RR 0.72, 95 % CI 0.53-1.00), computerized physician order entry (RR 0.51, 95 % 0.40-0.66), barcode-assisted medication administration with electronic administration records (RR 0.71, 95 % CI 0.53-0.95), nursing education/training using simulation (RR 0.17, 95 % CI 0.08-0.38), and clinical pharmacist-led training (RR 0.76, 95 % CI 0.67-0.87). Increased or equivocal outcome rates were found for the remaining studies. Weaknesses in the internal or external validity were apparent for most included studies.

LIMITATIONS

Theses and conference proceedings were excluded and data produced outside commercial publishing were not searched.

CONCLUSIONS

There is emerging evidence of the impact of specific interventions to reduce MAEs in hospitals, which warrant further investigation using rigorous and standardized study designs. Theory-driven efforts to understand the underlying causes of MAEs may lead to more effective interventions in the future.

A medication safety model: a case study in Thai hospital

Reaching zero defects is vital in medication service. Medication error can be reduced if the causes are recognized. The purpose of this study is to search for a conceptual framework of the causes of medication error in Thailand and to examine relationship between these factors and its importance. The study was carried out upon an in-depth case study and survey of hospital personals who were involved in the drug use process. The structured survey was based on Emergency Care Research Institute (ECRI) (2008) questionnaires focusing on the important factors that affect the medication safety. Additional questionnaires included content to the context of Thailand's private hospital, validated by five-hospital qualified experts. By correlation Pearson analysis, the result revealed 14 important factors showing a linear relationship with drug administration error except the medication reconciliation. By independent sample t-test, the administration error in the hospital was significantly related to external impact. The multiple regression analysis of the detail of medication administration also indicated the patient identification before administration of medication, detection of the risk of medication adverse effects and assurance of medication administration at the right time, dosage and route were statistically significant at 0.05 level. The major implication of the study is to propose a medication safety model in a Thai private hospital.

A mnemonic for pharmacy students to use in pharmacotherapy assessment

OBJECTIVE

To introduce pharmacy students to a patient-centered mnemonic to aid them in remembering the most important parameters when assessing a patient's drug therapy and to determine whether use of the device improved students' clinical examination scores.

DESIGN

Second-year pharmacy students were randomized to an intervention group or a control group. A 30-minute presentation on the rationale of the mnemonic and how to apply it to clinical scenarios was given to the intervention group and then a case-based multiple-choice clinical examination was administered. Students in the control group completed the same examination first and then were given the mnemonic.

ASSESSMENT

Ninety-five students completed the examination. Examination scores of students in the intervention group were 6% higher than those of students in the control group (p = 0.04). A 6-question survey instrument was administered to both groups and the majority of students agreed that they would use the mnemonic when assessing patients during their upcoming practice experiences. One-hundred percent of the students stated that the mnemonic definitely or probably helped them (or would have helped them) think critically when assessing the patient cases.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacy students who used a mnemonic device for pharmacotherapy assessment exhibited better decision-making skills and made fewer errors than students who did not use the mnemonic.

Checking in healthcare safety: theoretical basis and practical application

PURPOSE

Healthcare includes important processes such as checking to reduce errors. Checking is a prescribed part of many patient care activities with many checks being performed during one hospital admission. Some may be standard but unwritten practices, whereas others are laid down in official guidance. Errors in the bedside checking procedure are the commonest cause of mis-transfusion, so more thorough checking could prevent adverse events. This paper aims to explore and enhance understanding regarding healthcare checking procedures. In doing so it seeks to identify a further research agenda.

DESIGN/METHODOLOGY/APPROACH

The computerised databases CINAHL, PsycLIT, EMBASE, PubMed, PsycINFO and MEDLINE were searched using specific indexing terms and free text including "bedside, peri-operative safety, theatre checking and checklists". Only English publications were included.

FINDINGS

Like any human activity, checking is part of personality and behaviour. There are several psychological factors relevant to patient safety, including: memory, prospective memory, automaticity and responsibility. All are relevant to healthcare.

RESEARCH LIMITATIONS/IMPLICATIONS

Bandolier criteria have not explicitly been used within this review but have been met. It would be beneficial for future reviews to explicitly state how Bandolier criteria are met. This would possibly enhance the publications' scientific quality.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

There is much to learn regarding interacting factors that influence healthcare checking procedures and ultimately checking performance. The authors recommend that relationships between checking and personality should be explored. Furthermore, exploring how healthcare "mindfulness" might be promoted and what reminder/checking strategies healthcare staff already use in their day-to-day work routines should be examined.

ORIGINALITY/VALUE

Several psychological factors involved in checking and its relevance to healthcare and patient safety are identified. Additionally, recommendations for further research are indicated.

What evidence supports the use of computerized alerts and prompts to improve clinicians' prescribing behavior?

Alerts and prompts represent promising types of decision support in electronic prescribing to tackle inadequacies in prescribing. A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the efficacy of computerized drug alerts and prompts searching EMBASE, CINHAL, MEDLINE, and PsychINFO up to May 2007. Studies assessing the impact of electronic alerts and prompts on clinicians' prescribing behavior were selected and categorized by decision support type. Most alerts and prompts (23 out of 27) demonstrated benefit in improving prescribing behavior and/or reducing error rates. The impact appeared to vary based on the type of decision support. Some of these alerts (n = 5) reported a positive impact on clinical and health service management outcomes. For many categories of reminders, the number of studies was very small and few data were available from the outpatient setting. None of the studies evaluated features that might make alerts and prompts more effective. Details of an updated search run in Jan 2009 are included in the supplement section of this review.