Article

An exploratory study measuring verbal order content and context

Department of Health Management and Informatics, University of Missouri Center for Health Care Quality, Columbia, Missouri 65212, USA.
Quality and Safety in Health Care (Impact Factor: 2.16). 07/2009; 18(3):169-73. DOI: 10.1136/qshc.2008.029827
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The use of verbal orders, while essential in some healthcare settings, has been identified as a potential contributor to poor quality and less safe care. Despite the widespread use of verbal orders, little research attention has been paid to understanding and measuring the content of verbal orders or variables related to the context in which verbal orders are made.
This paper first identifies variables related to verbal order content and context, and then provides detailed analyses from two exploratory studies conducted in one community hospital.
The data presented were collected using both a paper-based manual audit, and an analysis of data generated from a computerised order entry system.
Selected analyses focus of variations in types and timing of verbal orders hospital-wide as well as for specific inpatient units, changes in verbal order utilisation following implementation of a computerised provider order entry system, and an analysis of the presence of sound-alike and high-alert medications in verbal orders.

0 Followers
 · 
88 Views
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Poor teamwork and communication between healthcare staff are correlated to patient safety incidents. However, the organisational factors responsible for these issues are unexplored. Root cause analyses (RCA) use human factors thinking to analyse the systems behind severe patient safety incidents. The objective of this study is to review RCA reports (RCAR) for characteristics of verbal communication errors between hospital staff in an organisational perspective. Two independent raters analysed 84 RCARs, conducted in six Danish hospitals between 2004 and 2006, for descriptions and characteristics of verbal communication errors such as handover errors and error during teamwork. Raters found description of verbal communication errors in 44 reports (52%). These included handover errors (35 (86%)), communication errors between different staff groups (19 (43%)), misunderstandings (13 (30%)), communication errors between junior and senior staff members (11 (25%)), hesitance in speaking up (10 (23%)) and communication errors during teamwork (8 (18%)). The kappa values were 0.44-0.78. Unproceduralized communication and information exchange via telephone, related to transfer between units and consults from other specialties, were particularly vulnerable processes. With the risk of bias in mind, it is concluded that more than half of the RCARs described erroneous verbal communication between staff members as root causes of or contributing factors of severe patient safety incidents. The RCARs rich descriptions of the incidents revealed the organisational factors and needs related to these errors.
    BMJ quality & safety 03/2011; 20(3):268-74. DOI:10.1136/bmjqs.2010.040238 · 3.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Evaluate the rate, type and severity of medication errors occurring during Medical Emergency Team (MET) care at a large, tertiary-care, academic medical center. A prospective, observational evaluation of 50 patients that required MET care was conducted. Data on medication use were collected using a direct-observation method whereby an observer documented drug information such as drug, dose, frequency, rate of administration and administration technique. Subsequently, a team of three clinicians assessed rate, type and severity of medication errors using definitions consistent with United States Pharmacopeia MEDMARX system. Severity was assessed on a scale of minor, moderate and severe. One hundred eighty six doses were observed for 36 different medications. A total of 296 errors were identified; of these 196 errors (66%) were inappropriate aseptic technique. Of the remaining 100 errors, 46% were prescribing errors, 28% administration technique errors, 14% mislabeling errors, 10% drug preparation errors and 2% improper dose prescribing. Examples included: (1) prescribing errors, (2) administering wrong doses, (3) mislabeling, and (4) wrong administration technique such as not flushing intravenous medication through intravenous access. The rate of medication administration errors was 1.6 errors/dose including aseptic technique and 0.5 errors/dose excluding aseptic technique. A notable portion (14%) of errors was considered at least moderate in severity. One out of 2 doses was administered in error after errors of using inappropriate aseptic technique were excluded. There is a need for education and systematic changes to prevent medication errors during medical emergencies as an effort to avoid harm.
    Resuscitation 10/2011; 83(4):482-7. DOI:10.1016/j.resuscitation.2011.10.001 · 3.96 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Poor teamwork and communication between healthcare staff are correlated to patient safety incidents. However, the organisational factors responsible for these issues are unexplored. Root cause analyses (RCA) use human factors thinking to analyse the systems behind severe patient safety incidents. The objective of this study is to review RCA reports (RCAR) for characteristics of verbal communication errors between hospital staff in an organisational perspective. Two independent raters analysed 84 RCARs, conducted in six Danish hospitals between 2004 and 2006, for descriptions and characteristics of verbal communication errors such as handover errors and error during teamwork. Raters found description of verbal communication errors in 44 reports (52%). These included handover errors (35 (86%)), communication errors between different staff groups (19 (43%)), misunderstandings (13 (30%)), communication errors between junior and senior staff members (11 (25%)), hesitance in speaking up (10 (23%)) and communication errors during teamwork (8 (18%)). The kappa values were 0.44-0.78. Unproceduralized communication and information exchange via telephone, related to transfer between units and consults from other specialties, were particularly vulnerable processes. With the risk of bias in mind, it is concluded that more than half of the RCARs described erroneous verbal communication between staff members as root causes of or contributing factors of severe patient safety incidents. The RCARs rich descriptions of the incidents revealed the organisational factors and needs related to these errors.
    Postgraduate medical journal 11/2011; 87(1033):783-9. DOI:10.1136/pgmj.2010.040238rep · 1.55 Impact Factor