Preventable Adverse Drug Events Among Inpatients: A Systematic Review

Safety of deer antler extract in children: A 12-week randomized controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Deer antlers have been used as strong tonifying medicine in Asian countries, especially for the growth and development of children in pediatrics of Korean medicine. The safety of deer antler in adults cannot be applied directly to children because of their physiological characteristics. To accumulate reliable data on the safety of deer antler in pediatric populations, well-designed clinical studies are required.

METHODS

This research is a 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial evaluating the safety of deer antler extract (DAE) in children. The DAE group received an intervention containing 1586 mg of DAE, whereas the control group received a placebo for 12 weeks. The safety was assessed by monitoring adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and laboratory test results.

RESULTS

One hundred participants were included in the safety analysis. Three and 2 participants in the DAE and control groups, respectively, reported ADRs. There was no significant difference in incidence between the 2 groups. ADRs are categorized into gastrointestinal and skin-related symptoms. No serious ADR was observed throughout the study. The laboratory test results were within or outside the normal range at clinically insignificant levels.

CONCLUSION

The research discovered that the DAE is safe in terms of ADRs and laboratory parameters under the conditions studied. Further studies are required to accumulate safety data about DAE dosage adjustment and potential interactions with other medicines.

Understanding the informal aspects of medication processes to maintain patient safety in hospitals: a sociotechnical ethnographic study in paediatric units

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are common in hospitals, affecting one in six child in-patients. Medication processes are complex systems. This study aimed to explore the work-as-done of medication safety in three English paediatric units using direct observation and semi-structured interviews. We found that a combination of the physical environment, traditional work systems and team norms were among the systemic barriers to medicines safety. The layout of wards discouraged teamworking and reinforced professional boundaries. Workspaces were inadequate, and interruptions were uncontrollable. A less experienced workforce undertook prescribing and verification while more experienced nurses undertook administration. Guidelines were inadequate, with actors muddling through together. Formal controls against ADEs included checking (of prescriptions and administration) and barcode administration systems, but these did not integrate into workflows. Families played an important part in the safe administration of medication and provision of information about their children but were isolated from other parts of the system.

Medication Safety Gaps in English Pediatric Inpatient Units: An Exploration Using Work Domain Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Medication is a common cause of preventable medical harm in pediatric inpatients. This study aimed to examine the sociotechnical system surrounding pediatric medicines management, to identify potential gaps in this system and how these might contribute to adverse drug events (ADEs).

METHODS

An exploratory prospective qualitative study in pediatric wards in three hospitals in the north of England was conducted between October 2020 and May 2022. Analysis included a documentary analysis of 72 policies and procedures and analysis of field notes from 60 hours of participant observation. The cognitive work analysis prompt framework was used to generate a work domain analysis (WDA) and identify potential contributory factors to ADEs.

RESULTS

The WDA identified 2 functional purposes, 7 value/priority measures, 6 purpose-related functions, 11 object-related processes and 14 objects. Structured means-ends connections supported identification of 3 potential contributory factors-resource limitations, cognitive demands, and adaptation of processes. The lack of resources (equipment, materials, knowledge, and experience) created an environment where distractions and interruptions were unavoidable. Families helped provide practical support in medicines administration but were largely unacknowledged at an organizational level. There was a lack of teamwork with regards to medication with different professionals responsible for different parts of the system. Mandated safety checks on medicines were frequently omitted because of limited resources and perceived redundancy. Interventions to support adherence to safety policies were also often bypassed because they created more work.

CONCLUSIONS

The WDA has provided insights into the complex system of medication safety for children in hospital and has facilitated the identification of potential contributory factors to ADEs. We therefore advocate (in priority order) for processes to involve parents in the care of their children in hospital, development of skill-mix interventions to ensure appropriate expertise is available where it is needed, and modified checking procedures to permit staff to use their skills and judgment effectively and efficiently.

Assessing the severity of medication administration errors identified in an observational study using a valid and reliable method

BACKGROUND

Epidemiological data on medication errors severity are scarce. The assessment of the prevalence and severity of medication errors may be limited because of several reasons, including a lack of standardization in the method of identifying medication administration errors and little knowledge about the appropriate assessment tools to measure severity. Thus, in this study, we aim to assess the potential severity of errors identified by direct observation in a teaching hospital.

METHODS

We used a validated method for assessing the potential severity of medication administration errors. Responses are scored on a 10-point scale. The 203 errors identified in a previous study were organized per similarity, resulting in 67 errors. This list was assessed by a panel of a physician, a nurse, and two pharmacists. The average score for each of the 67 errors was estimated considering the scores given by the 4 judges. Errors with a severity index < 3, between 3 and 7, and > 7 were considered minor, moderate, and severe, respectively.

RESULTS

Professionals classified the potential clinical significance of the errors as minor, moderate, and severe in 8.8% (18/203), 82.8% (168/203), and 8.4% (17/203) of the cases, respectively. Most errors considered potentially serious (41%, 7/17) were technical errors. Most potentially serious errors involved insulin. Regarding the administration route, nine (53%) potentially serious errors involved medications administered intravenously.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the errors were considered as potentially moderated by the expert panel; however, the frequency of potentially serious errors was higher than that in previous studies using the same methodology, which highlights the need for strategies to reduce their occurrence.

Determining Medication Errors in an Adult Intensive Care Unit

INTRODUCTION

Research addressing the costs of Medication errors (MEs) is still scarce despite issues related to patient safety having significant economic and health impacts, making it imperative to analyze the costs and adverse events related to MEs for a better patient, professional, and institutional safety.

AIM

To identify the number of medication errors and verify whether this number was associated with increased hospitalization costs for patients in an Intensive Care Unit (ICU).

METHOD

This retrospective cross-sectional cohort study evaluated secondary data from patients' electronic medical records to compile variables, create a model, and survey hospitalization costs. The statistical analysis included calculating medication error rates, descriptive analysis, and simple and multivariate regression.

RESULTS

The omission error rate showed the highest number of errors per drug dose (59.8%) and total errors observed in the sample (55.31%), followed by the time error rate (26.97%; 24.95%). The omission error had the highest average when analyzing the entire hospitalization (170.40) and day of hospitalization (13.79). Hospitalization costs were significantly and positively correlated with scheduling errors, with an increase of BRL 121.92 (about USD $25.00) (95% CI 43.09; 200.74), and to prescription errors, with an increase of BRL 63.51 (about USD $3.00) (95% CI 29.93; 97.09).

CONCLUSION

We observed an association between two types of medication errors and increased hospitalization costs in an adult ICU (scheduling and prescription errors).

Small patients, big challenges: navigating pediatric drug manipulations to prevent medication errors - a comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors during drug manipulations in pediatric care pose significant challenges to patient safety and optimal medication management. Epidemiological studies have revealed a high prevalenceof medication errors throughout the medication process. Due to the lack of age-appropriate dosage forms, medication manipulation is common in pediatric drug administration. The consequences of these manipulations on drug efficacy and safety could be devastating, highlighting the need for evidence-based guidelines and standardized compounding practices.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on examining medication errors in pediatric care and delving into the manipulation of medicinal products.

EXPERT OPINION

The observed prevalence of medication errors and manipulations underscores the importance of addressing these issues to enhance patient safety and improve medication outcomes in pediatric care. Overall, the development of age-appropriate formulations and the dissemination of comprehensive clinical guidelines are essential steps toward improving medication safety and minimizing manipulations in pediatric healthcare settings.

Preventing Medication Errors in Pediatric Anesthesia: A Systematic Scoping Review

OBJECTIVE

Preventing medication errors and improving patient safety in pediatric anesthesia are top priorities. This systematic scoping review was conducted to identify and summarize reports on medication errors in pediatric anesthesia. The study also aimed to qualitatively synthesize medication error situations in pediatric anesthesia and recommendations to eliminate/minimize them.

METHODS

The databases: Cochrane, MEDLINE through PubMed, Embase, CINAHL through EBSCO, and PsycINFO were extensively searched from their inception to March 3, 2020. Error situations in pediatric anesthesia and recommendations to minimize/reduce these errors were synthesized qualitatively. Recommendations were graded by level of evidence using the methodology of the Joanna Briggs Institute.

RESULTS

Data were extracted from 39 publications. Dosing errors were the most commonly reported. Scenarios representing medication (n = 33) error situations in pediatric anesthesia and recommendations to eliminate/minimize medication errors (n = 36) were qualitatively synthesized. Of the recommendations, 2 (5.6%) were related to manufacture, 4 (11.1%) were related to policy, 1 (2.8%) was related to presentation to user, 1 (2.8%) was related to process tools, 17 (47.2%) were related to administration, 3 (8.3%) were related to recording/documentation, and 8 (22.2%) recommendations were classified as others. Of those, 29 (80.6%), 3 (8.3%), 3 (8.3%), and 1 (2.8%) were graded as evidence level 1, 2, 3, and 5, respectively.

DISCUSSION

Medication error situations that might occur in pediatric anesthesia and recommendations on how to eliminate/minimize medication errors were also qualitatively synthesized. Adherence to recommendations might reduce the incidence of medication errors in pediatric anesthesia.

Development of the Leapfrog Group's Bar Code Medication Administration Standard to Address Hospital Inpatient Medication Safety

ABSTRACT

Medication errors are the most common type of error in hospitals and reflect a leading cause of avoidable harm to patients. Bar code medication administration (BCMA) systems are a technology designed to help intercept medication errors at the point of medication administration. This article describes the process of developing, testing, and refining a standard for BCMA adoption and use in U.S. hospitals, as measured through the Leapfrog Hospital Survey. Building on the published literature and an expert panel's collective experience in studying, implementing, and using BCMA systems, the expert panel recommended a standard with 4 key domains. Leapfrog's BCMA standard provides hospitals with a "how-to guide" on what best practice looks like for using BCMA to ensure safe medication administration at the bedside.

Drug administration errors in Latin America: A systematic review

Purpose

This study systematically reviewed studies to determine the frequency and nature of medication administration errors in Latin American hospitals.

Summary

We systematically searched the medical literature of seven electronic databases to identify studies on medication administration errors in Latin American hospitals using the direct observation method. Studies published in English, Spanish, or Portuguese between 1946 and March 2021 were included. A total of 10 studies conducted at 22 hospitals were included in the review. Nursing professionals were the most frequently observed during medication administration and were observers in four of the ten included studies. Total number of error opportunities was used as a parameter to calculate error rates. The administration error rate had a median of 32% (interquartile range 16%–35.8%) with high variability in the described frequencies (9%–64%). Excluding time errors, the median error rate was 9.7% (interquartile range 7.4%–29.5%). Four different definitions of medication errors were used in these studies. The most frequently observed errors were time, dose, and omission. Only four studies described the therapeutic classes or groups involved in the errors, with systemic anti-infectives being the most reported. None of the studies assessed the severity or outcome of the errors. The assessment of the overall risk bias revealed that one study had low risk, three had moderate risk, and three had high risk. In the assessment of the exploratory, observational, and before-after studies, two were classified as having fair quality and one as having poor quality.

Conclusion

The administration error rate in Latin America was high, even when time errors were excluded. The variation observed in the frequencies can be explained by the different contexts in which the study was conducted. Future research using direct observation techniques is necessary to more accurately estimate the nature and severity of medication administration errors.

Incidence, severity, and preventability of adverse events during the induction of patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in a tertiary care pediatric hospital in Mexico

Healthcare-associated adverse events represent a heavy burden of symptoms for pediatric oncology patients. Their description allows knowing the safety and quality of the care processes in countries with limited resources. This study aimed to describe the incidence, types, severity, and preventability of adverse events occurring in pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia during the induction phase in a tertiary care pediatric hospital in Mexico. This study analyzed a cohort based on medical records of between 2015 and 2017. Initially, information on patients and adverse events was collected; subsequently, two pediatric oncologist reviewers independently classified adverse events, severity and preventability. Agreement between reviewers was evaluated. Adverse events incidence rates were estimated by type, severity, and preventability. One-hundred and eighty-one pediatric patients pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia were studied. An overall adverse events rate of 51.8 per 1000 patient-days was estimated, involving 81.2% of patients during induction. Most adverse events were severe or higher (52.6%). Infectious processes were the most common severe or higher adverse event (30.5%). The presence of adverse events caused 80.2% of hospital readmissions. Of the adverse events, 10.5% were considered preventable and 53.6% could be ameliorable in severity. Improving the safety and quality of the care processes of children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia is possible, and this should contribute to the mitigation and prevention of adverse events associated morbidity and mortality during the remission induction phase.

Validation of a method to assess the severity of medication administration errors in Brazil: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are frequent and have a high economic and social impact and is critical to know their severity. A variety of tools exist to measure and classify the harms associated with medication errors, but few are internationally validated.

DESIGN AND METHODS

It was decided to validate a method proposed by Dean and Barber for assessment of the potential severity of medication administration errors. A number of thirty health care professionals (doctors, nurses and pharmacists) from Brazil will receive an invitation to take part by scoring 50 cases of medication errors gathered from an original UK study regarding their potential harm to the patient on scale 0 to 10. Sixteen cases with known actual harm outcomes will be used to assess the validity of their scoring. By looking at 10 errors (out of the 50 cases) scored twice, reliability shall be assessed; and potential sources of variability in scoring will be evaluated depending on the severity of each of error case, the occasion when the scores were given, the scorer, their profession, and interactions among these variables. Generalizability theory will be used for analysing data. Expected impact of the study for public health: This study was submitted to the evaluation of the Research Ethics Committee of the Complexo Hospitalar Universitário Professor Edgard Santos and approved under no. 3.102.570/2019. This is the first validation of this method for use in Brazil, and will allow researchers to conduct more standardised evaluations of interventions to reduce the impact of medication errors.

Description of a clinical decision support tool with integrated dose calculator for paediatrics

Medication errors, especially dosing errors are a leading cause of preventable harm in paediatric patients. The paediatric patient population is particularly vulnerable to dosing errors due to immaturity of metabolising organs and developmental changes. Moreover, the lack of clinical trial data or suitable drug forms, and the need for weight-based dosing, does not simplify drug dosing in paediatric or neonatal patients. Consequently, paediatric pharmacotherapy often requires unlicensed and off-label use including manipulation of adult dosage forms. In practice, this results in the need to calculate individual dosages which in turn increases the likelihood of dosing errors. In the age of digitalisation, clinical decision support (CDS) tools can support healthcare professionals in their daily work. CDS tools are currently amongst the gold standards in reducing preventable errors. In this publication, we describe the development and core functionalities of the CDS tool PEDeDose, a Class IIa medical device software certified according to the European Medical Device Regulation. The CDS tool provides a drug dosing formulary with an integrated calculator to determine individual dosages for paediatric, neonatal, and preterm patients. Even a technical interface is part of the CDS tool to facilitate integration into primary systems. This enables the support of the paediatrician directly during the prescribing process without changing the user interface.Conclusion: PEDeDose is a state-of-the-art CDS tool for individualised paediatric drug dosing that includes a certified calculator. What is Known: • Dosing errors are the most common type of medication errors in paediatric patients. • Clinical decision support tools can reduce medication errors effectively. Integration into the practitioner's workflow improves usability and user acceptance. What is New: • A clinical decision support tool with a certified integrated dosing calculator for paediatric drug dosing. • The tool was designed to facilitate integration into clinical information systems to directly support the prescribing process. Any clinical information system available can interoperate with the PEDeDose web service.

How effective are electronic medication systems in reducing medication error rates and associated harm among hospital inpatients? A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess: 1) changes in medication error rates and associated patient harm following electronic medication system (EMS) implementation; and 2) evidence of system-related medication errors facilitated by the use of an EMS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched Medline, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL for studies published between January 2005 and March 2019, comparing medication errors rates with or without assessments of related harm (actual or potential) before and after EMS implementation. EMS was defined as a computer-based system enabling the prescribing, supply, and/or administration of medicines. Study quality was assessed.

RESULTS

There was substantial heterogeneity in outcomes of the 18 included studies. Only 2 were strong quality. Meta-analysis of 5 studies reporting change in actual harm post-EMS showed no reduced risk (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.18-8.38, P = .8) and meta-analysis of 3 studies reporting change in administration errors found a significant reduction in error rates (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.72-0.83, P = .004). Of 10 studies of prescribing error rates, 9 reported a reduction but variable denominators precluded meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of system-related medication errors; 5 quantified their occurrence.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Despite the wide-scale adoption of EMS in hospitals around the world, the quality of evidence about their effectiveness in medication error and associated harm reduction is variable. Some confidence can be placed in the ability of systems to reduce prescribing error rates. However, much is still unknown about mechanisms which may be most effective in improving medication safety and design features which facilitate new error risks.

Interventions to Reduce Pediatric Prescribing Errors in Professional Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review of the Last Decade

INTRODUCTION

Pediatric medication therapy is prone to errors due to the need for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic individualization and the diverse settings in which pediatric patients are treated. Prescribing errors have been reported as the most common medication error.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this review was to systematically identify interventions to reduce prescribing errors and corresponding patient harm in pediatric healthcare settings and to evaluate their impact.

METHODS

Four databases were systematically screened (time range November 2011 to December 2019), and experimental studies were included. Interventions to reduce prescribing errors were extracted and classified according to a 'hierarchy of controls' model.

RESULTS

Forty-five studies were included, and 70 individual interventions were identified. A bundle of interventions was more likely to reduce prescribing errors than a single intervention. Interventions classified as 'substitution or engineering controls' were more likely to reduce errors in comparison with 'administrative controls', as is expected from the hierarchy of controls model. Fourteen interventions were classified as substitution or engineering controls, including computerized physician order entry (CPOE) and clinical decision support (CDS) systems. Administrative controls, including education, expert consultations, and guidelines, were more commonly identified than higher level controls, although they may be less likely to reduce errors. Of the administrative controls, expert consultations were most likely to reduce errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions to reduce pediatric prescribing errors are more likely to be successful when implemented as part of a bundle of interventions. Interventions including CPOE and CDS that substitute risks or provide engineering controls should be prioritized and implemented with appropriate administrative controls including expert consultation.

Relationships between nurse managers' work activities, nurses' job satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and medication errors at the unit level: a correlational study

BACKGROUND

Nurse managers play a critical role in enhancing nursing and patient outcomes. The work of nurse managers, who can be described as middle-managers at health care organizations, is complex and changes on a daily basis. Only a few studies have clarified how nurse managers divide their time across various work activities. This study aimed to describe the relationships between nurse managers' work activities, nurses' job satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and medication errors at the hospital unit level.

METHODS

A cross-sectional and correlational study design was used. The data were collected from nurse managers (n = 29), nursing staff (n = 306), and patients (n = 651) from 28 units across three Finnish acute care hospitals between April and November 2017. In addition, data concerning medication errors (n = 468) over one calendar year (2017) were acquired from the hospitals' incident reporting register. Analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) was used to estimate relationships between data from subareas of Nurse Managers' Work Content Questionnaire, Kuopio University Hospital Job Satisfaction Scale, and Revised Humane Caring Scale, along with medication error reports. A significance level of 95% was applied when estimating the covariances between variables. Unstandardized regression coefficients (B) were used to explain the relationships between variables.

RESULTS

Multiple relationships between nurse managers' work activities, nurses' job satisfaction, patient satisfaction, and medication errors were identified. Nurse managers' work activities had both positive and negative relationships on the other studied variables. The Requiring factors of work (p < .001) subarea of nurses' job satisfaction, total patient satisfaction (p < .001), and medication errors (p < .001) were identified as the variables most significantly affected by other factors.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings suggest that nurse managers should focus on improving nursing practices by managing and organizing nurses' work in a way that makes their employees feel supported, motivated and secure. Furthermore, nurse managers should adopt a leadership style that emphasizes safe and patient-centered care. The results also suggest that the administration of today's health care organizations should actively evaluate nurse managers' share of work activities to ensure that their daily work is in line with the organizational goals.

The Burden of Preventable Adverse Drug Events on Hospital Stay and Healthcare Costs in Japanese Pediatric Inpatients: The JADE Study

Background:

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a burden to the healthcare system. Preventable ADEs, which was ADEs due to medication errors, could be reduced if medication errors can be prevent or ameliorate.

Objective:

We investigated the burden of preventable ADEs on the length of hospital stay (LOS) and costs, and estimated the national burden of preventable ADEs in pediatric inpatients in Japan.

Methods:

We analyzed data from the Japan Adverse Drug Events (JADE) study on pediatric patients and estimated the incidence of preventable ADEs and associated extended LOS. Costs attributable to extended LOS by preventable ADEs were calculated using a national statistics database and we calculated the effect of preventable ADEs on national cost excess.

Results:

We included 907 patients with 7377 patient-days. Among them, 31 patients (3.4%) experienced preventable ADEs during hospitalization. Preventable ADEs significantly increased the LOS by 14.1 days, adjusting for gender, age, ward, resident physician, surgery during hospitalization, cancer, and severe malformation at birth. The individual cost due to the extended LOS of 14.1 days was estimated as USD 8258. We calculated the annual extra expense for preventable ADEs in Japan as USD 329 676 760. Sensitivity analyses, considering the incidence of preventable ADEs and the length of hospital stay, showed that the expected range of annual extra expense for preventable ADEs in Japan is between USD 141 468 968 and 588 450 708.

Conclusion:

Preventable ADEs caused longer hospitalization and considerable extra healthcare costs in pediatric inpatients. Our results would encourage further efforts to prevent and ameliorate preventable ADEs.

Interventions to ensure medication safety in acute care: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are one of the leading avoidable sources of harm to hospital patients. In hospitals, a range of interventions have been used to reduce the risk of errors at each of the points they may occur, such as prescription, dispensing and/or administration. Systematic reviews have been conducted on many of these interventions; however, it is difficult to compare the clinical utility of any of the separate interventions without the use of a rigorous umbrella review methodology.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this umbrella review was to synthesize the evidence from all systematic reviews investigating the effectiveness of medication safety interventions, in comparison to any or no comparator, for preventing medication errors, medication-related harms and death in acute care patients.

METHOD

The review considered quantitative systematic reviews with participants who were healthcare workers involved in prescribing, dispensing or administering medications. These healthcare workers were registered nurses, enrolled or licensed vocational nurses, midwives, pharmacists or medical doctors. Interventions of interest were those designed to prevent medication error in acute care settings. Eligible systematic reviews reported medication errors, medication-related harms and medication-related death as measured by error rates, numbers of adverse events and numbers of medication-related deaths. To qualify for inclusion, systematic reviews needed to provide a clearly articulated and comprehensive search strategy, and evidence of critical appraisal of the included studies using a standardized tool. Systematic reviews published in English since 2007 were included until present (March 2020). We searched a range of databases such MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library for potentially eligible reviews. Identified citations were screened by two reviewers working independently. Potentially eligible articles were retrieved and assessed against the inclusion criteria and those meeting the criteria were then critically appraised using the JBI SUMARI instrument for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews and research syntheses. A predetermined quality threshold was used to exclude studies based on their reported methods. Following critical appraisal, data were extracted from the included studies by two independent reviewers using the relevant instrument in JBI SUMARI. Extracted findings were synthesized narratively and presented in tables to illustrate the reported outcomes for each intervention. The strength of the evidence for each intervention was indicated using 'traffic light' colors: green for effective interventions, amber for interventions with no evidence of an effect and red for interventions less effective than the comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 23 systematic reviews were included in this umbrella review. Most reviews did not report the number of participants in their included studies. Interventions targeted pharmacists, medical doctors, medical students and nurses, or were nonspecific about the participants. The majority of included reviews examined single interventions. All reviews were published and in English. Four interventions, medication administration education, medication reconciliation or review, specialist pharmacists' roles and physical or design modifications, reported effectiveness in reducing errors; however, heterogeneity between the included studies in these reviews was high.

CONCLUSION

For some interventions, there are strong indications of effectiveness in reducing medication errors in the inpatient setting. Government initiatives, policy makers and practitioners interested in improving medication safety are encouraged to adopt those interventions.

Interventions to Reduce Medication Dispensing, Administration, and Monitoring Errors in Pediatric Professional Healthcare Settings: A Systematic Review

Introduction: Pediatric patients cared for in professional healthcare settings are at high risk of medication errors. Interventions to improve patient safety often focus on prescribing; however, the subsequent stages in the medication use process (dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring) are also error-prone. This systematic review aims to identify and analyze interventions to reduce dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors in professional pediatric healthcare settings. Methods: Four databases were searched for experimental studies with separate control and intervention groups, published in English between 2011 and 2019. Interventions were classified for the first time in pediatric medication safety according to the "hierarchy of controls" model, which predicts that interventions at higher levels are more likely to bring about change. Higher-level interventions aim to reduce risks through elimination, substitution, or engineering controls. Examples of these include the introduction of smart pumps instead of standard pumps (a substitution control) and the introduction of mandatory barcode scanning for drug administration (an engineering control). Administrative controls such as guidelines, warning signs, and educational approaches are lower on the hierarchy and therefore predicted by this model to be less likely to be successful. Results: Twenty studies met the inclusion criteria, including 1 study of dispensing errors, 7 studies of drug administration errors, and 12 studies targeting multiple steps of the medication use process. A total of 44 interventions were identified. Eleven of these were considered higher-level controls (four substitution and seven engineering controls). The majority of interventions (n = 33) were considered "administrative controls" indicating a potential reliance on these measures. Studies that implemented higher-level controls were observed to be more likely to reduce errors, confirming that the hierarchy of controls model may be useful in this setting. Heterogeneous study methods, definitions, and outcome measures meant that a meta-analysis was not appropriate. Conclusions: When designing interventions to reduce pediatric dispensing, drug administration, and monitoring errors, the hierarchy of controls model should be considered, with a focus placed on the introduction of higher-level controls, which may be more likely to reduce errors than the administrative controls often seen in practice. Trial Registration Prospero Identifier: CRD42016047127.

Prevalence of Clinically Significant Drug-Drug Interactions Across US Children's Hospitals

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the prescribing of medications with potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in the pediatric population. The objective of this study was to determine the prevalence and variation of prescribing medications with clinically significant DDIs across children's hospitals in the United States.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients <26 years of age who were discharged from 1 of 52 US children's hospitals between January 2016 and December 2018. Fifty-three drug pairings with clinically significant DDIs in children were evaluated. We identified patient-level risk factors associated with DDI using multivariable logistic regression. Adjusted hospital-level rates of DDI exposure were derived by using a generalized linear mixed-effects model, and DDI exposure variations were examined across individual hospitals.

RESULTS

Across 52 children's hospitals, 47 414 (2.0%) hospitalizations included exposure to a DDI pairing (34.9 per 1000 patient-days) during the study period. One-quarter of pairings were considered contraindicated (risk grade X). After adjusting for hospital and clinical factors, there was wide variation in the percentage of DDI prescribing across hospitals, ranging from 1.05% to 4.92%. There was also substantial hospital-level variation of exposures to individual drug pairings. Increasing age, number of complex chronic conditions, length of stay, and surgical encounters were independently associated with an increased odds of DDI exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients hospitalized at US children's hospitals are frequently exposed to medications with clinically significant DDIs. Exposure risk varied substantially across hospitals. Further study is needed to determine the rate of adverse events due to DDI exposures and factors amenable for interventions promoting safer medication use.

Prevalence of Medication Errors Among Paediatric Inpatients: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

The risk of medication errors is high in paediatric inpatient settings. However, estimates of the prevalence of medication errors have not accounted for heterogeneity across studies in error identification methods and definitions, nor contextual differences across wards and the use of electronic or paper medication charts.

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to provide separate estimates of the prevalence of medication errors among paediatric inpatients, depending on hospital ward and the use of electronic or paper medication charts, that address differences in error identification methods and definitions.

METHODS

We systematically searched five databases to identify studies published between January 2000 and December 2018 that assessed medication error rates by medication chart audit, direct observation or a combination of methods.

RESULTS

We identified 71 studies, 19 involved paediatric wards using electronic charts. Most studies assessed prescribing errors with few studies assessing administration errors. Estimates varied by ward type. Studies of paediatric wards using electronic charts generally reported a reduced error prevalence compared to those using paper, although there were some inconsistencies. Error detection methods impacted the rate of administration errors in studies of multiple wards, however, no other difference was found. Definition of medication error did not have a consistent impact on reported error rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication errors are a frequent occurrence in paediatric inpatient settings, particularly in intensive care wards and emergency departments. Hospitals using electronic charts tended to have a lower rate of medication errors compared to those using paper charts. Future research employing controlled designs is needed to determine the true impact of electronic charts and other interventions on medication errors and associated harm among hospitalized children.

Prevalence and Nature of Medication Errors and Preventable Adverse Drug Events in Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Settings: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Children admitted to paediatric and neonatal intensive care units may be at high risk from medication errors and preventable adverse drug events.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to review empirical studies examining the prevalence and nature of medication errors and preventable adverse drug events in paediatric and neonatal intensive care units.

DATA SOURCES

Seven electronic databases were searched between January 2000 and March 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Quantitative studies that examined medication errors/preventable adverse drug events using direct observation, medication chart review, or a mixture of methods in children ≤ 18 years of age admitted to paediatric or neonatal intensive care units were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on study design, detection method used, rates and types of medication errors/preventable adverse drug events, and medication classes involved were extracted.

RESULTS

Thirty-five unique studies were identified for inclusion. In paediatric intensive care units, the median rate of medication errors was 14.6 per 100 medication orders (interquartile range 5.7-48.8%, n = 3) and between 6.4 and 9.1 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). In neonatal intensive care units, medication error rates ranged from 4 to 35.1 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2) and from 5.5 to 77.9 per 100 medication orders (n = 2). In both settings, prescribing and medication administration errors were found to be the most common medication errors, with dosing errors the most frequently reported error subtype. Preventable adverse drug event rates were reported in three paediatric intensive care unit studies as 2.3 per 100 patients (n = 1) and 21-29 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). In neonatal intensive care units, preventable adverse drug event rates from three studies were 0.86 per 1000 doses (n = 1) and 0.47-14.38 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). Anti-infective agents were commonly involved with medication errors/preventable adverse drug events in both settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication errors occur frequently in critically ill children admitted to paediatric and neonatal intensive care units and may lead to patient harm. Important targets such as dosing errors and anti-infective medications were identified to guide the development of remedial interventions.

The Impact of Technology on Prescribing Errors in Pediatric Intensive Care: A Before and After Study

BACKGROUND

Increased use of health information technology (HIT) has been advocated as a medication error reduction strategy. Evidence of its benefits in the pediatric setting remains limited. In 2012, electronic prescribing (ICCA, Philips, United Kingdom) and standard concentration infusions (SCIs)-facilitated by smart-pump technology-were introduced into the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of an Irish tertiary-care pediatric hospital.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the impact of the new technology on the rate and severity of PICU prescribing errors and identify technology-generated errors.

METHODS

A retrospective, before and after study design, was employed. Medication orders were reviewed over 24 weeks distributed across four time periods: preimplementation (Epoch 1); postimplementation of SCIs (Epoch 2); immediate postimplementation of electronic prescribing (Epoch 3); and 1 year postimplementation (Epoch 4). Only orders reviewed by a clinical pharmacist were included. Prespecified definitions, multidisciplinary consensus and validated grading methods were utilized.

RESULTS

A total of 3,356 medication orders for 288 patients were included. Overall error rates were similar in Epoch 1 and 4 (10.2 vs. 9.8%; p = 0.8), but error types differed (p < 0.001). Incomplete and wrong unit errors were eradicated; duplicate orders increased. Dosing errors remained most common. A total of 27% of postimplementation errors were technology-generated. Implementation of SCIs alone was associated with significant reductions in infusion-related prescribing errors (29.0% [Epoch 1] to 14.6% [Epoch 2]; p < 0.001). Further reductions (8.4% [Epoch 4]) were identified after implementation of electronically generated infusion orders. Non-infusion error severity was unchanged (p = 0.13); fewer infusion errors reached the patient (p < 0.01). No errors causing harm were identified.

CONCLUSION

The limitations of electronic prescribing in reducing overall prescribing errors in PICU have been demonstrated. The replacement of weight-based infusions with SCIs was associated with significant reductions in infusion prescribing errors. Technology-generated errors were common, highlighting the need for on-going research on HIT implementation in pediatric settings.

Standardising the Classification of Harm Associated with Medication Errors: The Harm Associated with Medication Error Classification (HAMEC)

Classifying harm associated with a medication error can be time consuming and labour intensive and limited studies undertake this step. There is no standardised process, and few studies that report harm assessment provide adequate methods to allow for study replication. Studies typically mention that a clinical review panel classified patient harm and provide a reference to a classification tool. Moreover, in many studies it is unclear whether potential or actual harm was classified as studies refer only to ‘error severity’. The tools used to categorise the severity of patient harm vary widely across studies and few have been assessed for inter-rater reliability and criterion validity. In this paper, we describe the systematic process we undertook to synthesise the defining elements and strengths, while mitigating the limitations, of existing harm classification tools to derive the Harm Associated with Medication Error Classification (HAMEC). This new tool provides a harm classification for use across clinical and research settings. The provision of an explicit process for its application and guiding category descriptors are designed to reduce the risk of misclassification and produce results that are comparable across studies. As the World Health Organisation embarks on its international safety challenge of reducing medication-related harm by 50%, accompanying methodological advances are required to measure progress.

Implementation and strength of root cause analysis recommendations following serious adverse events involving paediatric patients in the Queensland public health system between 2012 and 2014

AIM

This study evaluates the implementation rate and strength of the recommendations developed in all root cause analyses (RCAs) performed following serious clinical incidents involving children that have resulted in permanent harm or death in Queensland public hospitals over a 3-year period.

METHODS

Severity assessment classification 1 events were identified from a Queensland Paediatric Quality Council database of paediatric clinical incidents that occurred in Queensland between 1 January 2012 and 31 December 2014. There were 150 recommendations extracted from RCAs pertaining to the 42 serious adverse events involving paediatric patients.

RESULTS

Of the recommendations, 82% were implemented; 33% of recommendations were classified as stronger, 33% as intermediate and 34% weaker in terms of their potential to improve patient safety.

CONCLUSIONS

This study describes the implementation of recommendations and classifies them in terms of potential to prevent patient harm and save lives. Future research is needed to determine if the RCA process does indeed prevent harm.

Effectiveness of double checking to reduce medication administration errors: a systematic review

Background

Double checking medication administration in hospitals is often standard practice, particularly for high-risk drugs, yet its effectiveness in reducing medication administration errors (MAEs) and improving patient outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating evidence of the effectiveness of double checking to reduce MAEs.

Methods

Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid@Journals, OpenGrey) were searched for studies evaluating the use and effectiveness of double checking on reducing medication administration errors in a hospital setting. Included studies were required to report any of three outcome measures: an effect estimate such as a risk ratio or risk difference representing the association between double checking and MAEs, or between double checking and patient harm; or a rate representing adherence to the hospital’s double checking policy.

Results

Thirteen studies were identified, including 10 studies using an observational study design, two randomised controlled trials and one randomised trial in a simulated setting. Studies included both paediatric and adult inpatient populations and varied considerably in quality. Among three good quality studies, only one showed a significant association between double checking and a reduction in MAEs, another showed no association, and the third study reported only adherence rates. No studies investigated changes in medication-related harm associated with double checking. Reported double checking adherence rates ranged from 52% to 97% of administrations. Only three studies reported if and how independent and primed double checking were differentiated.

Conclusion

There is insufficient evidence that double versus single checking of medication administration is associated with lower rates of MAEs or reduced harm. Most comparative studies fail to define or investigate the level of adherence to independent double checking, further limiting conclusions regarding effectiveness in error prevention. Higher-quality studies are needed to determine if, and in what context (eg, drug type, setting), double checking produces sufficient benefits in patient safety to warrant the considerable resources required.

CRD42018103436.