Decision-making processes used by nurses during intravenous drug preparation and administration

AIM

  The aim of this study was to explore the decision-making processes that nurses use during intravenous drug administration and how this influences risk taking and errors.

BACKGROUND

  Intravenous drug errors have been estimated to be a third of all drug errors. Previous drug error research has focused on observation of nurses and errors they make but has not attempted to understand the decision-making processes used during the preparation and administration of intravenous drugs.

METHOD

  A three-phased ethnographic study was carried out in a specialist cancer hospital in 2007 using focus groups, observation and interviews. This article is concerned with the observation and interview phase. Observation took place on two wards, each over a week. Twenty nurses were observed preparing and administering intravenous drugs; then interviewed about their procedure. Data analysis was carried out using a five stage approach.

FINDINGS

  Major themes identified include: interruptions; identification and knowing the patient; routinized behaviour, prevention of errors. These represent the findings of the observation and interviews with the nurses. One key finding was the lack of checking of patient identity prior to IV drug administration, which appeared to be based on nurses feeling they knew the patient well enough, although this was in contrast to how they checked even familiar drugs. This article will focus on identification and knowing the patient.

CONCLUSION

Implications for practice included: exploring new and effective methods of education based on behavioural theories; involving staff in updating policies and procedures; formal assessment of staff during intravenous preparation and administration.

Identifying violation-provoking conditions in a healthcare setting

Procedural violations (intentional deviations from established protocols) are prone to occur in many occupational settings, with a potentially detrimental effect on quality or safety. They are thought to result from organisational practices and the social characteristics of rule-related behaviour. This study makes use of qualitative methods to investigate the nature and causes of violations in anaesthetic practice. Twenty-three consultant anaesthetists took part in the study, which involved naturalistic observations and semi-structured interviews. Several factors influencing anaesthetic violations were identified. These include the nature of the rule, the anaesthetist (both as an individual and as a professional group) and the situation. Implications for the understanding and management of human reliability issues within an organisation are discussed. This study provides an insight into procedural violations, which pose a threat to organisational safety but are distinct from human errors. The study also demonstrates the value of qualitative methods in ergonomics research. It is of relevance to researchers and practitioners interested in human reliability and error, especially in healthcare.

Drug errors, qualitative research and some reflections on ethics

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

Observational methods as part of a qualitative approach have been specifically employed in the study of drug error and have undeniable strengths. This position paper will examine some recent research raising a number of ethical, and tangentially, methodological issues concerning the qualitative study of drug errors within United Kingdom National Health Service hospitals. Reflections on the views and ethical conduct of other qualitative researchers are provided to contextualize the discussion.

BACKGROUND

The impact of a drug error, and any resultant adverse event can be significant. The human and financial costs are considerable. Establishing an accurate estimation of the frequency of adverse event and reporting rates has been difficult; additionally, methodological weaknesses in medical error research have sometimes caused further difficulties. Unsurprisingly, observational studies and for that matter, a whole range of other methods are now being considered in the quest to establish both understanding and predictability in relation to medical error.

RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE

It is argued here that any participants in medical error research should be treated in a way that takes account of the prevailing culture of health care and, in the United Kingdom, the current ethos of government policy on medical error. This requires gaining informed consent, promoting transparency in method, and providing the opportunity for participants to learn. Effective error researchers can clearly increase the available knowledge in this critical area but ethical considerations and their chosen methods should show an appropriate level of respect for their participants. Carefully implemented qualitative approaches can help realize such respect.