Promoting Safety in Child and Adolescent Health Care: Conference Overview

What causes prescribing errors in children? Scoping review

OBJECTIVES

(1) Systematically assemble, analyse and synthesise published evidence on causes of prescribing error in children. (2) Present results to a multidisciplinary group of paediatric prescribing stakeholders to validate findings and establish how causative factors lead to errors in practice.

DESIGN

Scoping review using Arksey and O'Malley's framework, including stakeholder consultation; qualitative evidence synthesis.

METHODS

We followed the six scoping review stages. (1) Research question-the research question was 'What is known about causes of prescribing error in children?' (2) Search strategy-we searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL (from inception to February 2018), grey literature and reference lists of included studies. (3) Article selection-all published evidence contributing information on the causes of prescribing error in children was eligible for inclusion. We included review articles as secondary evidence to broaden understanding. (4) Charting data-results were collated in a custom data charting form. (5) Reporting results-we summarised article characteristics, extracted causal evidence and thematically synthesised findings. (6) Stakeholder consultation-results were presented to a multidisciplinary focus group of six prescribing stakeholders to establish validity, relevance and mechanisms by which causes lead to errors in practice.

RESULTS

68 articles were included. We identified six main causes of prescribing errors: children's fundamental differences led to individualised dosing and calculations; off-licence prescribing; medication formulations; communication with children; and experience working with children. Primary evidence clarifying causes was lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

Specific factors complicate prescribing for children and increase risk of errors. Primary research is needed to confirm and elaborate these causes of error. In the meantime, this review uses existing evidence to make provisional paediatric-specific recommendations for policy, practice and education.

Children's Health Care in the First National Healthcare Quality Report and National Healthcare Disparities Report

BACKGROUND

The first National Healthcare Quality Report (NHQR) and National Healthcare Disparities Report (NHDR) are landmark events for children's health care quality and are expected to stimulate local measurement, benchmarking, and quality improvement efforts.

METHOD

The authors select findings from the NHQR and NHDR, focusing on topics reflecting a range of health care and health care settings affecting children. They highlight disparities by race/ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and insurance source. They critique the first NHQR and NHDR from a child health perspective. SELECT NHQR/DR FINDINGS: Quality-of-care issues in the effectiveness domain were identified for black infant mortality, low and very low birth weight rates, antibiotic use for the common cold, and childhood hospitalizations for asthma. Immunization rates have improved. Patient centeredness and timeliness results vary by race, ethnicity and income. The NHDR found that Hispanic and low-income children are most likely to be uninsured for part of the year. Groups of children most likely to have public coverage are American Indian/Alaska native, black, and Hispanic. CRITIQUE OF REPORTS: The structure and criteria used for the first reports limit their usefulness from a child health perspective. A basic problem is that the conceptualizations of health and health care that are driving national initiatives on quality are based largely on an adult chronic care model focused on conditions with high expenditures as treated in the mainstream health care delivery system.

CONCLUSION

NHQR and NHDR provide essential information on children's health care quality. Future reports can be improved by including child-relevant perspectives in priority-setting and data-gathering efforts.