Medication Administration Time Study (MATS): nursing staff performance of medication administration.

Northwestern Memorial Hospital, 251 East Huron Street, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.
The Journal of nursing administration (Impact Factor: 1.37). 06/2009; 39(5):204-10. DOI: 10.1097/NNA.0b013e3181a23d6d
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The aim of this study was to develop and test a method for assessing nursing effort and workflow in the medication administration process.
Thousands of patients die each year from medication errors, and hospitals strive for error reduction. Bar-coding medication administration systems have been proposed as a solution; however, many hospitals lack the necessary pre-implementation workflow process data on medication administration processes to evaluate the effectiveness of their current systems.
A descriptive observation study of 151 nurses during 980 unique medication observations in medical-surgical units at a rural hospital, an urban community hospital, and an academic medical center was conducted.
Nurses averaged more than 15 minutes on each medication pass and were at risk of an interruption or distraction with every medication pass.
System challenges faced by nurses during the medication administration process lead to threats to patient safety, work-arounds, workflow inefficiencies, and distractions during a time when focus is most needed to prevent error.

1 Bookmark
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Drug handling in paediatric intensive care units (PICU) is prone to medication errors. We aimed to identify type and prevalence of those errors and to assess preventative interventions.Prospective intervention study investigating a 3-step intervention for preventing errors in drug handling in a 10-bed PICU of a university hospital. Nurses' drug handling was mon-itored in daily routine to identify the number of patients affected by errors and overall prevalence and types of errors in drug handling. We implemented a comprehensive intervention consisting of an information handout, a training course, and a 76-page reference book tailored to reduce the prevalence.The prevalence of errors in drug han-dling decreased from 83% (555 errors/668 pro-cesses) to 63% (554/883; p<0.001) after the intervention. The number of affected patients remained unchanged (95% vs. 89%, p=0.370). Peroral (PO) drugs (1.33 errors/process) were more error-prone than intravenous (IV) drugs (0.64), despite being used less frequently (27% vs. 73% of all processes, p<0.001). The interventions decreased the prevalence to 0.77 errors/process (p<0.001) in PO and to 0.52 in IV drugs (p=0.025).Errors in drug handling were alarmingly frequent. PO drugs were frequently subject to errors, even though being used less frequently. The implementation of a comprehensive intervention succeeded in reducing the prevalence of errors. Yet further refinements are necessary to decrease also the number of affected patients.
    Klinische Pädiatrie 04/2014; 226(2):62-67. · 1.90 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PurposeTo present findings from the Collaborative Alliance for Nursing Outcomes’ (CALNOC) hospital medication administration (MA) accuracy assessment in a sample of acute care hospitals. Aims were as follows: (1) to describe the CALNOC MA accuracy assessment, (2) to examine nurse adherence to six safe practices during MA, (3) to examine the prevalence of MA errors in adult acute care, and (4) to explore associations between safe practices and MA accuracy.Methods Using a cross-sectional design, point in time, and convenience sample, direct observation data were collected by 43 hospitals participating in CALNOC's benchmarking registry. Data included 33,425 doses from 333 observation studies on 157 adult acute care units. Results reveal that the most common MA safe practice deviations were distraction/interruption (22.89%), not explaining medication to patients (13.90%), and not checking two forms of ID (12.47%). The most common MA errors were drug not available (0.76%) and wrong dose (0.45%). The overall percentage of safe practice deviations per encounter was 11.40%, whereas the overall percentage of MA errors was 0.32%.Conclusions and ImplicationsFindings predict that for 10,000 MA encounters, 27,630 safe practice deviations and 770 MA errors will occur. A 36% reduction in practice deviation per encounter prevents 4.4% MA errors. Ultimately, reliably performing safe practices improves MA accuracy.
    Journal for Healthcare Quality 11/2014; 36(6).
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this state-of-the-science review was to examine empirical evidence from studies of interruptions conducted in acute care nurses' work environments. A total of 791 articles published from 2001 through 2011 were reviewed; 31 met the criteria to be included in the sample. Despite sustained multinational and multidisciplinary attention to interruptions during nurses' work, the current findings suggest that beliefs about the ill effects of interruptions remain more conjecture than evidence-based. Pre-existing beliefs and biases may interfere with deriving a more accurate grasp of interruptions and their effects. Future research would benefit from examinations of interruptions that better capture their complexity, to include their relationships to both positive and negative outcomes for both patients and health care workers. © 2012 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Res Nurs Health 36:38–53, 2013
    Research in Nursing & Health 02/2013; 36(1). · 1.16 Impact Factor