International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2005
Drug administration errors and their determinants in pediatric in-patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Prot Sonia, Fontan Jean Eudes, Alberti Corinne, Bourdon Olivier, Farnoux Caroline, Macher Marie Alice, Foureau Anita, Faye Albert, Beaufils François, Gottot Serge, Brion Françoise
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: . To quantify the type and frequency of drug administration errors to pediatric in-patients and to identify associated factors.
DESIGN: Prospective direct-observation study of drug administration errors from April 2002 to March 2003.
SETTING: Four clinical units in a pediatric teaching hospital.
STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Twelve observers accompanied nurses giving medications and witnessed the preparation and administration of all drugs to all patients on all weekday mornings.
INTERVENTION: None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Discrepancies between physicians' orders and actual drug administration.
RESULTS: During the 1719 observed administrations to 336 patients by 485 nurses, 538 administration errors were detected, involving timing (36%), route (19%), dosage (15%), unordered drug (10%), or form (8% form). These errors occurred for 467 (27%) of the 1719 administrations. Intravenous drugs (OR = 0.28; CI = 0.16-0.49; versus miscellaneous) were associated with fewer errors. Error rates were higher for cardiovascular (OR = 3.38; CI = 1.24-9.27; versus miscellaneous) and central nervous system drugs (OR = 2.65; CI = 1.06-6.59; versus miscellaneous); unspecified dispensing system (OR = 2.06; CI = 1.29-3.29; versus store in the unit); non-intravenous non-oral administration (OR = 4.44; CI = 1.81-10.88; versus oral administration); preparation by the pharmacy (OR = 1.66; CI = 1.10-2.51); and administration by a hospital pool nurse, temporary staffing agency nurse, or nurse intern (OR = 1.67; CI = 1.04-2.68; versus registered full-time nurse). Each additional management procedure in the patient increased the risk of error (OR = 1.22; CI = 1.01-1.48).
CONCLUSIONS: The risk factors identified in our study should prove useful for designing preventive strategies, thereby improving the quality of care.
DESIGN: Prospective direct-observation study of drug administration errors from April 2002 to March 2003.
SETTING: Four clinical units in a pediatric teaching hospital.
STUDY PARTICIPANTS: Twelve observers accompanied nurses giving medications and witnessed the preparation and administration of all drugs to all patients on all weekday mornings.
INTERVENTION: None.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Discrepancies between physicians' orders and actual drug administration.
RESULTS: During the 1719 observed administrations to 336 patients by 485 nurses, 538 administration errors were detected, involving timing (36%), route (19%), dosage (15%), unordered drug (10%), or form (8% form). These errors occurred for 467 (27%) of the 1719 administrations. Intravenous drugs (OR = 0.28; CI = 0.16-0.49; versus miscellaneous) were associated with fewer errors. Error rates were higher for cardiovascular (OR = 3.38; CI = 1.24-9.27; versus miscellaneous) and central nervous system drugs (OR = 2.65; CI = 1.06-6.59; versus miscellaneous); unspecified dispensing system (OR = 2.06; CI = 1.29-3.29; versus store in the unit); non-intravenous non-oral administration (OR = 4.44; CI = 1.81-10.88; versus oral administration); preparation by the pharmacy (OR = 1.66; CI = 1.10-2.51); and administration by a hospital pool nurse, temporary staffing agency nurse, or nurse intern (OR = 1.67; CI = 1.04-2.68; versus registered full-time nurse). Each additional management procedure in the patient increased the risk of error (OR = 1.22; CI = 1.01-1.48).
CONCLUSIONS: The risk factors identified in our study should prove useful for designing preventive strategies, thereby improving the quality of care.