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

Applying the Generalizability Theory to Identify the Sources of Validity Evidence for the Quality of Communication Questionnaire

Effective doctor-patient-family communication is an integral and sensitive part of health care, assessing its quality is essential to identify aspects needing disclosure and, if necessary, improvement. Cross-sectional study aimed to analyze the sources of evidence of validity and the number of participants needed to reliably apply the Quality of Communication Questionnaire (QoC) through Generalizability Theory (GT). The mean age of the 150 patients hospitalized at the end of life was 50.5 (SD = 13.8) years, the mean hospital length of stay was 7.5 (SD = 10.2) days, 56.9% were male. Regarding the 105 patients' family members of patients whose mean length of hospital stay was 9.5 (SD = 9.1) days, their mean age was 42.2 (SD = 14.7) years, 69.5% were female. GT was used to quantify the minimum number of questionnaires needed, with the aim of reaching a reliable estimate of QoC with G-coefficients. To reach a reliability of .90, there is a need for 25 for the Eρ2 questionnaires and 35 for the Φ. The exact estimation identified the minimum number of questionnaires required for the evaluation of physicians by patients. To obtain a reliability of .90, there is a need for 30 and 40 questionnaires for the G-coefficients. A practical and fast application makes it possible to use QoC in its entirety or alone to evaluate general communication or communication about palliative care. Furthermore, based on these results, it was possible to identify which aspects were effective or ineffective in these contexts.

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

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors are frequent and have high economic and social impacts; however, some medication errors are more likely to result in harm than others. Therefore, it is critical to determine their severity. Various tools exist to measure and classify the harm associated with medication errors; although, few have been validated internationally.

METHODS

We validated an existing method for assessing the potential severity of medication administration errors (MAEs) in Brazil. Thirty healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses and pharmacists) from Brazil were invited to score 50 cases of MAEs as in the original UK study, regarding their potential harm to the patient, on a scale from 0 to 10. Sixteen cases with known harmful outcomes were included to assess the validity of the scoring. To assess test-retest reliability, 10 cases (of the 50) were scored twice. Potential sources of variability in scoring were evaluated, including the occasion on which the scores were given, the scorers, their profession and the interactions among these variables. Data were analysed using generalisability theory. A G coefficient of 0.8 or more was considered reliable, and a Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess test-retest reliability.

RESULTS

To obtain a generalisability coefficient of 0.8, a minimum of three judges would need to score each case with their mean score used as an indicator of severity. The method also appeared to be valid, as the judges' assessments were largely in line with the outcomes of the 16 cases with known outcomes. The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the distribution was homogeneous above and below the mean difference for doctors, pharmacists and nurses.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study demonstrate the reliability and validity of an existing method of scoring the severity of MAEs for use in the Brazilian health system.

Attributes of errors, facilitators, and barriers related to rate control of IV medications: a scoping review

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) medication is commonly administered and closely associated with patient safety. Although nurses dedicate considerable time and effort to rate the control of IV medications, many medication errors have been linked to the wrong rate of IV medication. Further, there is a lack of comprehensive studies examining the literature on rate control of IV medications. This study aimed to identify the attributes of errors, facilitators, and barriers related to rate control of IV medications by summarizing and synthesizing the existing literature.

METHODS

This scoping review was conducted using the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and PRISMA-ScR. Overall, four databases-PubMed, Web of Science, EMBASE, and CINAHL-were employed to search for studies published in English before January 2023. We also manually searched reference lists, related journals, and Google Scholar.

RESULTS

A total of 1211 studies were retrieved from the database searches and 23 studies were identified from manual searches, after which 22 studies were selected for the analysis. Among the nine project or experiment studies, two interventions were effective in decreasing errors related to rate control of IV medications. One of them was prospective, continuous incident reporting followed by prevention strategies, and the other encompassed six interventions to mitigate interruptions in medication verification and administration. Facilitators and barriers related to rate control of IV medications were classified as human, design, and system-related contributing factors. The sub-categories of human factors were classified as knowledge deficit, performance deficit, and incorrect dosage or infusion rate. The sub-category of design factor was device. The system-related contributing factors were classified as frequent interruptions and distractions, training, assignment or placement of healthcare providers (HCPs) or inexperienced personnel, policies and procedures, and communication systems between HCPs.

CONCLUSIONS

Further research is needed to develop effective interventions to improve IV rate control. Considering the rapid growth of technology in medical settings, interventions and policy changes regarding education and the work environment are necessary. Additionally, each key group such as HCPs, healthcare administrators, and engineers specializing in IV medication infusion devices should perform its role and cooperate for appropriate IV rate control within a structured system.

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.