Errors in administration of parenteral drugs in intensive care units: Multinational prospective study

Department of Emergency Medicine, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
BMJ (online) (Impact Factor: 17.45). 02/2009; 338(mar12 1):b814. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.b814
Source: PubMed


To assess on a multinational level the frequency, characteristics, contributing factors, and preventive measures of administration errors in parenteral medication in intensive care units.
Observational, prospective, 24 hour cross sectional study with self reporting by staff.
113 intensive care units in 27 countries.
1328 adults in intensive care.
Number of errors; impact of errors; distribution of error characteristics; distribution of contributing and preventive factors.
861 errors affecting 441 patients were reported: 74.5 (95% confidence interval 69.5 to 79.4) events per 100 patient days. Three quarters of the errors were classified as errors of omission. Twelve patients (0.9% of the study population) experienced permanent harm or died because of medication errors at the administration stage. In a multiple logistic regression with patients as the unit of analysis, odds ratios for the occurrence of at least one parenteral medication error were raised for number of organ failures (odds ratio per increase of one organ failure: 1.19, 95% confidence interval 1.05 to 1.34); use of any intravenous medication (yes v no: 2.73, 1.39 to 5.36); number of parenteral administrations (per increase of one parenteral administration: 1.06, 1.04 to 1.08); typical interventions in patients in intensive care (yes v no: 1.50, 1.14 to 1.96); larger intensive care unit (per increase of one bed: 1.01, 1.00 to 1.02); number of patients per nurse (per increase of one patient: 1.30, 1.03 to 1.64); and occupancy rate (per 10% increase: 1.03, 1.00 to 1.05). Odds ratios for the occurrence of parenteral medication errors were decreased for presence of basic monitoring (yes v no: 0.19, 0.07 to 0.49); an existing critical incident reporting system (yes v no: 0.69, 0.53 to 0.90); an established routine of checks at nurses' shift change (yes v no: 0.68, 0.52 to 0.90); and an increased ratio of patient turnover to the size of the unit (per increase of one patient: 0.73, 0.57 to 0.93).
Parenteral medication errors at the administration stage are common and a serious safety problem in intensive care units. With the increasing complexity of care in critically ill patients, organisational factors such as error reporting systems and routine checks can reduce the risk for such errors.

Download full-text


Available from: Rui Moreno,
  • Source
    • "Preservation of patient safety is a major concern in health care provision systems (3). According to Valentin et al. one of the important stages of raising the safety level of patients is identification of medication errors and their causes (4). Since the Institute of Medicine (IOM) raised awareness about human errors in 2000, many attempts have been made to improve patient safety, such as epidemiological and etiological identification of medication errors (5). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Patient safety is one of the main concepts in the field of healthcare provision and a major component of health services quality. One of the important stages in promotion of the safety level of patients is identification of medication errors and their causes. Medical errors such as medication errors are the most prevalent errors that threaten health and are a global problem. Execution of medication orders is an important part of the treatment and care process and is regarded as the main part of the nurses’ performance. The purpose of this study was to explore the medication error reporting rate, error types and their causes among nurses in the emergency department. In this descriptive study, 94 nurses of the emergency department of Imam Khomeini Hospital Complex were selected based on census in 2010–2011. Data collection tool was a researcher-made questionnaire consisting of two parts: demographic information, and types and causes of medication errors. After confirming content-face validity, reliability of the questionnaire was determined to be 0.91 using Cronbach’s alpha test. Data analyses were performed by descriptive statistics and inferential statistics. SPSS-16 software was used in this study and P values less than 0.05 were considered significant. The mean age of the nurses was 27.7 ± 3.4 years, and their working experience was 7.3 ± 3.4 years. Of participants 46.8% had committed medication errors in the past year, and the majority (69.04%) had committed the errors only once. Thirty two nurses (72.7%) had not reported medication errors to head nurses or the nursing office. The most prevalent types of medication errors were related to infusion rates (33.3%) and administering two doses of medicine instead of one (23.8%). The most important causes of medication errors were shortage of nurses (47.6%) and lack of sufficient pharmacological information (30.9%). This study showed that the risk of medication errors among nurses is high and medication errors are a major problem of nursing in the emergency department. We recommend increasing the number of nurses, adjusting the workload of the nursing staff in the emergency department, retraining courses to improve the staff’s pharmacological information, modification of the education process, encouraging nurses to report medical errors and encouraging hospital managers to respond to errors in a constructive manner in order to enhance patient safety
    Journal of Medical Ethics and History of Medicine 11/2013; 6:11.
  • Source
    • "Few studies have attempted to address this question. Valentin et al. could show that the number of errors in medication (wrong drug, wrong dose, wrong route) was lower in hospitals with a CIRS compared to hospitals without [24]. The identification of outcome measures is a major obstacle, taking into account that the implementation of CIRS might affect unpredicted parameters and that the definition of a control period should only differ by the implementation of CIRS without additional measures to reduce medical errors. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Reducing medical errors has become an international concern. Population-based studies consistently demonstrate inacceptable high rates of medical injury and preventable deaths. Thus, electronic critical incident reporting systems are now increasingly used in hospitals, predominantly in anesthesia. However, studies systematically analyzing critical incidents are scarce. Our aim was to describe content and causes of critical incidents in our Clinic for Internal Medicine. We retrospectively analyzed all critical incidents reported during a 54-months period. Between implementation and analysis, 456 incidents were reported anonymously in the commercially available platform-independent, web-based critical incident reporting system. All incidents were analyzed according to the reporting profession, time point during hospitalization process, content and potential causes.Most incidents occurred on medical wards (80%). The most frequent type of incidents was medication errors (62%). These incidents primarily occurred when prescribing and/or administering drugs (30% and 29% of medication errors respectively). So-called [single low-9 quotation mark]human errors', i.e. occurring without apparent external factor, were the most frequently indicated cause of critical incidents (56%) followed by insufficient communication (26%). These problems primarily occurred between different groups of health care professionals and between different departments. The described types and reasons of critical incidents remained stable during the observation period. The findings of our analysis of the character and type of critical incidents occurring in a tertiary care clinic for internal medicine reported in an anonymous, voluntary, electronic reporting system suggest that strategies to improve communication and medication delivery are most promising to avoid critical incidents.
    BMC Research Notes 07/2013; 6(1):276. DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-6-276
  • Source
    • "Studies conducted in various healthcare settings report medication error rates between 19–70%, depending on research methodology [7, 9–13]. High rates continue to exist despite increased levels of awareness about ME in healthcare over the past decade and new developments in technology designed to reduce such errors [14]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study was (1) to determine frequency and type of medication errors (MEs), (2) to assess the number of MEs prevented by registered nurses, (3) to assess the consequences of ME for patients, and (4) to compare the number of MEs reported by a newly developed medication error self-reporting tool to the number reported by the traditional incident reporting system. We conducted a cross-sectional study on ME in the Cardiovascular Surgery Department of Bern University Hospital in Switzerland. Eligible registered nurses (n = 119) involving in the medication process were included. Data on ME were collected using an investigator-developed medication error self reporting tool (MESRT) that asked about the occurrence and characteristics of ME. Registered nurses were instructed to complete a MESRT at the end of each shift even if there was no ME. All MESRTs were completed anonymously. During the one-month study period, a total of 987 MESRTs were returned. Of the 987 completed MESRTs, 288 (29%) indicated that there had been an ME. Registered nurses reported preventing 49 (5%) MEs. Overall, eight (2.8%) MEs had patient consequences. The high response rate suggests that this new method may be a very effective approach to detect, report, and describe ME in hospitals.
    01/2013; 2013:671820. DOI:10.1155/2013/671820
Show more