Author(s)

Carmen Ortí Juan, Cristina Toro Blanch, Maria Àngels Gispert Ametller, Ana Perez Plasencia, Cristina Lecha Ochoa, Anna Dordà Benito, Rosa Sacrest Güell

Why was it done?

Prescribing errors (PE) are an important cause of medication-related adverse events in the Emergency Departments (ED) but limited data are available in ED with electronic prescribing and administration (ePA) systems. Knowing the frequency and types of PE can help healthcare professionals to prevent and reduce the risk of them occurring.

What was done?

To determine the rate of PE in the ED, to classify incident types and to identify critical points where measures should be implemented to improve patient safety.

How was it done?

Prospective, observational and cross-sectional study in an ED with ePA system during 6 working days (May-June 2021). The inclusion criteria were patients stayed more than 8 hours in the ED and all patients awaiting hospitalization. Prescriptions were analyzed by a multidisciplinary team made up of two pharmacists, an emergency physician and the person in charge of the hospital’s medication errors committee. PE were reported to the hospital’s patient safety-related incident notification system.

What has been achieved?

Of the 65 prescriptions revised during the study period, PE were reported in 84 cases and 15 situations with the capacity to cause errors were detected. The average age of patients was 67 ± (SD=17,9) years and each prescription had an average of 8.4 medications. The rate of PE was 1.52 errors per patient, being higher in less severe patients than monitored patients (1.09 vs 2.0 PE per patient, respectively). The most common types of EP were omission of the usual medication (60.7%), wrong dose (15.5%), wrong frequency (7.1%) and drug is not indicated (7.1%). No adverse reactions related to EP were detected. According to the Spanish consensus about Medication Reconciliation in Emergency Units, 47.1% of omissions of usual medication were drugs that should be reconciled during the first 4 hours in the ED. The results of the study and the importance of medication reconciliation are highlighted in a session in the ED.

What next?

The PE rate in the ED was 1.52 per patient and the main type was omission of the usual medication. A cross sectional study will be made in the future and compared to the current one to establish the impact of the implemented measures on the PE rate.

Author(s)

Monira Alwhaibi

Why was it done?

This study is the first project of the STOP ME projects which aims to develop a tool that can assess the application of the essential strategies that can stop or minimize MEs in healthcare institutes in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, stakeholders in the healthcare system can identify current gaps that need feature improvement to enhance patient safety

What was done?

Medication Errors (ME) are defined as unintentional drug-induced harm that led to morbidity and mortality. The STOP (ME) project is a comprehensive series of research studies that aim to explore MEs in Saudi Arabia and how to stop such harmful events.

How was it done?

Extensive search of the literature review for the essential strategies to stop or minimize MEs was carried by the research team to develop a draft of the aimed tool. The survey tool was sent in round 1 to the Delphi experts’ panel for review. Based on received recommendations, the tool was updated and sent for round 2 review and consensus. The developed tool was then piloted to test the practicability of the tool before running the survey on large sample size (second project). The study was approved by the King Saud University Medical Centre IRB ethics committee [20/0153/IRB].

What has been achieved?

After using the Delphi technique two major changes happened to the survey. 1) Section A was removed (high alert medications). 2) A new section was added (ISMP publications) with some minor changes. Launching a pilot survey on thirty healthcare practitioners (physicians n=11, pharmacists n=10, nurses n=9) resulted in further minor changes by adding two new columns. The final tool was a survey consists of six sections including Demographics, Prescription, Dispensing, Administration, Monitoring and Quality, and Targeted Medication Safety Best Practices for Hospitals. All combined 86 questions with the determined time to answer the survey is in the range of 25-30 minutes. Overall feedback of the pilot survey was good.

What next?

This initiative “STOP ME” will have a significant impact in the field of medication safety research and will build awareness among institutes in Saudi Arabia that are lacking important strategies that prevent MEs

Author(s)

Alba María Fernández Varela, Laura López Sandomingo, Nieves Valcarce Pardeiro, Isaura Rodríguez Penín

Why was it done?

.

What was done?

.

How was it done?

.

What has been achieved?

.

What next?

.

Author(s)

Charlotte Stafford, Aoife Delaney, Virginia Silvari, Thomas Cronin, Deirdre Lynch

Why was it done?

The Pharmacy Department dispenses clozapine to 142 patients. A new prescription was issued each time a patient was dispensed clozapine (approximately 40 new prescriptions per week). From January 2019 to June 2020 there were 42 clozapine incidents (incidents/month= 2) reported by the Pharmacy Department to the MHU. A four week review also showed that prescription queries (dose changes and transcription errors) consumed 6 hours of pharmacy staff time. The new 6-monthly, electronically stored prescription and the dedicated email address should address these issues.

What was done?

A newly devised proforma clozapine prescription has been developed by the Pharmacy Department and has become valid for 6 months for patients on 4-weekly blood monitoring. A copy of each patient’s prescription is stored electronically in the Mental Health Unit (MHU) share drive. A new dedicated pharmacy clozapine email address has been generated for all clozapine dose changes to be communicated to.

How was it done?

Four new clozapine prescriptions were developed by the Pharmacy Department:
– a maintenance dose prescription
– standard titration days 1 to 8
– standard titration days 8 to 15
– blank titration prescription.
The new prescriptions for patients on 4-weekly blood monitoring, valid for 6 months, are now stored in the MHU share drive to reduce the risk of transcribing errors.

What has been achieved?

Once the new system had been established, a further 4 week review showed that only 10 minutes over 4 weeks was spent by pharmacy staff dealing with a prescription query. All dose changes were now communicated by email. Incident reporting has decreased, with 5 clozapine incidents being reported by the Pharmacy Department between January to June 2021 (incident/month <1).

What next?

A business case highlighting the importance of a dedicated Clozapine Pharmacist has been submitted to further develop the clinic and ensure safety of this vulnerable cohort of patients.

Author(s)

Connor Thompson, Alison Orr

Why was it done?

Surgical patients are at risk of medication-related adverse events, with some of these patients having co-morbidities requiring long-term medications prior to surgery. Published data suggests pharmacist interventions can reduce adverse drug reactions (ADRs) and medication errors and reduce hospital length of stay.

What was done?

The effect of implementing a pharmacist into the HpB surgical ward round (WR) was unknown, this would also support ongoing service development projects in liver pharmacy on patient pathways.

This study aimed to establish the range and clinical impact of interventions made by the specialist pharmacist when attending HpB post-surgical WR as part of ongoing pharmacy engagement and service development.

How was it done?

A prospective study looking at interventions of a specialist pharmacist on WR over a one-month period, attending two WR per week. Review of all post-surgical HpB on an inpatient ward. All interventions collated and categorised based on commonality.

What has been achieved?

Over the course of data collection, the pharmacist reviewed 140 patients and made 477 interventions as part of the WR. This included 45 history medications being started, identification of 32 ADRs to current treatment, 16 instances of vancomycin dose adjustments, confirmation of anticoagulation for 17 patients and addition of 101 antibiotic stop dates contributing to better antimicrobial stewardship. There were also 70 instances of a nurse/doctor/patient requiring additional information on medication treatments.

What next?

This has highlighted the scale of interventions a pharmacist can make on a WR. Emphasising not only adjustment of medications but also the need for medication related information by healthcare professionals and patients alike.

Moving forward a pharmacist will attend at least two WR per week, with potential scope for support in pre-assessment and post-operative clinics to review weaning of analgesia and long-term management of pancreatic replacement for example.

With the recent announcement regarding new standards for the initial education and training of pharmacists in the UK, it would be valuable to assess the impact of a prescribing pharmacist on these WR.

Pdf

Author(s)

Elodie Delavoipière, Laura Fazilleau, Carine Lehoussel, Isabelle Goyer, François-Xavier Roth, Julien Mourdie, Agnès Bobay-Madic, Simon Rodier, Bernard Guillois, Albane Cherel

Why was it done?

360° virtual room of errors is an innovative educational tool which can be included in strategies of ME risk management. NICUs are high-risk areas and consequently, a priority target. Therefore, we developed and evaluated a virtual reality-training program based on medication error management in the NICU of a university hospital centre.

What was done?

A virtual reality-training course was developed and evaluated, regarding prevention and management of medication errors (ME) in NICUs.

How was it done?

A multidisciplinary working group was set up (2 pharmacists, 2 neonatologists, 1 pharmacy resident and 3 NICU nurses) to define: the target audience, the training model, the assessment methods (pre-training and post-training evaluations), training days and educational materials.

What has been achieved?

The program was intended for professionals involved in the medication circuit in the NICU: physicians, residents, and nurses. Weekly sessions have been scheduled in order to train 99 professionals. Every session was run by 3 professionals (physician, nurse and pharmacist) and lasted two hours and a half. The session was divided into 5 stages: 1/pre-training evaluation, 2/briefing, 3/360° digital simulation allowing ME detection, 4/debriefing, 5/ post-training evaluation. Although, it was a digital-training, a pedagogical formula with “classroom” training sessions has been chosen in order to promote interactivity between learners and trainers particularly during the debriefing. This virtual reality-training course was assessed by Kirkpatrick’s four levels of training evaluation model: satisfaction questionnaires, knowledge evaluation and skills self-assessment, audits of practices, monitoring of indicators (adverse event reports). Assessments were done before each session, immediately after and within 3 months of the session, to both evaluate and enhance educational impact.

What next?

This concept promotes the link between clinicians from the NICU and the multi-disciplinary approach concerning the risk management of ME. By directly involving all the healthcare professionals, this innovative training provides a patient-safety culture development and the implementation of safety measures. The implementation of this training concept in a multi-centric assessment of professional practices should enable to confirm pedagogical interest of such innovative sessions and his deployment in other health facilities.

Pdf

Author(s)

Božena Bürmen

Why was it done?

In University Medical Centre Ljubljana (UMCL) a HAM list was created in 2008 and has not been significantly changed since then. Our aim was to develop a systematic strategy to review the list by including local data.

What was done?

We comprehensively updated the hospital list of high-alert medications (HAM) and identified hospital specific medications not yet present on HAM lists. We joined international HAM data supported by medication error (ME) reports and expert opinion with data from the hospital ME reporting system.

How was it done?

We analysed 390 MEs submitted to the UMCL ME reporting system from 2016 to 2018. We compared the HAM list from Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) and the UMCL HAM list. The criteria such as frequency of the reported ME, severity of harm for the patient, affected population, novelty, etc, were used to identify potential HAM. Furthermore, we calculated the probability of the ME report for the individual medications from the reported MEs and the hospital medication consumption data. The calculation was done for the medications involved in 3 or more reported MEs (Tyynismaa et al, 2017) and for the medications involved in MEs which caused harm to the patient.

What has been achieved?

The joined results from the comparison of HAM lists and reported MEs showed that several other medications could be added to the UMCL HAM list, e.g. individualised parenteral nutrition for the paediatric population, oral sedation agents for children, dialysis solutions, lidocaine IV, methadone, bupivacaine, and nusinersen. The probability-based HAM identifying method supported our previous suggestions to extend the UMCL HAM list. Additionally, the method unexpectedly revealed medications with a high probability of ME and/or harm for the patients, that are not included in any HAM list (ISMP, UMCL), such as romiplostim, parenteral iron preparations, ampicillin with sulbactam, and others.

What next?

In future we plan to develop a paediatric specific HAM list based on the same strategy; i.e. considering international suggestions and analysing paediatric ME reports in UMCL.

Author(s)

Alice Oborne, Mark Kinirons, Virginia Aguado, Steve Wanklyn, Laura Watson, Jaymi Mistry, Duncan McRobbie, Abhiti Gulati, Emma Ritchie, David Wood, Niall Stewart-Kelcher, Adrian Hopper, Patricia Snell, Tony West

Why was it done?

Medicines are common interventions but have inherent dangers: 9% inpatient prescriptions contain errors, and medication errors occur at an estimated rate of one per patient per day [1-3]. Medication incident reporting was low, with high proportions of harmful incidents.

What was done?

Senior and junior staff collaborated to systematically improve safe medication processes and outcomes in a 1200-bedded multi-site hospital. The work aimed to reduce harm from medicines and improve medication safety culture.

How was it done?

Pharmacists, doctors, nurses and governance staff set up a Medication Safety Forum which met monthly to focus on high risk drugs, processes and patients. Published literature and international guidance were reviewed [1-3]. Twelve subgroups worked on safer opioid, insulin, anticoagulant, allergy and injectable medicine use and paediatric, elderly, critical care and peri-operative care. Subgroups published guidelines on the hospital intranet. External aviation and patient safety experts reviewed processes. Medication incident data were reported to staff monthly from June 2008. A monthly medication safety newsletter (total 68), screensaver messages, podcasts, mouse-mats, ‘safety days’, audit, training and senior staff promoted best practice. Electronic prescribing and medication administration (EPMA) with decision support was introduced in 2015.

What has been achieved?

The Medication Safety Forum met monthly 2009−2019. Medication incident reporting increased from 60 to over 400 per month (total 31330 over 11 years), whilst harmful incidents all reduced (Figure). Incidents with harm reduced from 51 to 24 in the first to last 20 months. Dose omissions reduced by 10% despite an increase in patient acuity, anticoagulant use and insulin use. The most common incident type was wrong dose, agreeing with national incident data. New guidelines included 30 for insulin, 28 anticoagulation and 19 opioid use. Medication incident reporting increased from 10th to highest in similar hospitals [3].

What next?

Multidisciplinary leadership, multimedia guidance, technology, audit and feedback in medication safety can be applied in any healthcare setting to enhance patient safety. Further system enhancements are planned.

References:
[1]National Patient Safety Agency 2004. Seven steps to patient safety
[2]Prescribing report, 2010. www.rcpLondon.ac.uk
[3]NHS Improvement organisational data reports

Pdf

Author(s)

Marijana Fortuna, Petra Tavčar, Jure Dolenc, Monika Sonc

Why was it done?

To support us in understanding our role in the preparation of chemotherapy products. To prevent the risk of harm to patients. Recognise prescribed error in pre-documented chemotherapy protocols

What was done?

Cytostatics are carcinogenic, mutagenic and teratogenic drugs. Handling requires a number of organisational and technical systems. All products should be safely and accurately prepared with special care to ensure the highest possible product quality, correct dose, the right patient, the right medicine, the right carrier solutions and right administration, without microbiological and particle contamination. The prescription and preparation of cytostatic drugs must be closely monitored. The most important factor in achieving this is the constant training of pharmacists in pharmaceutical techniques.

How was it done?

This year started with monthly reviews and training in the following subjects by using a written algorithm. Risk to product: Drugs reconstitution negative pressure isolators, leakage/damage or defects of vials, particles, transport and storage. Risk to patient: Incorrect calculations, microbiological contamination, incorrect administration, extravasation, incorrect administration route, incorrect labelling. Risk to operators: Contamination, toxicity, equipment, gloves, cleaning, occupational exposure. All checks have been made throughout the whole of preparation process, adhering to standard operating procedures (SOP-s).

What has been achieved?

We concluded that continuing education by using a writhen algorithm is useful practice. It helps prevent automatic work, remind us to check each step in process and know how to recognise errors in chemotherapy prescriptions and preparation. In 25 cases of prescribed chemotherapy, intervention of a pharmacist was required. In 5 cases of chemotherapy preparation, pharmaceutical techniques have detected a discrepancy in the prescribed therapy.

What next?

Regardless of experience at work, it is necessary to constantly repeat how to work properly, and awareness why we are doing this.

Pdf

Author(s)

Bernie Love, Tracy McFadden, Patrick Martin, Val Connolly, Deirdre Brennan, Michelle Griffin, Danielle Bracken, Siobhan Maguire, James Carr

Why was it done?

Avoidable harm caused by medication is one of the most commonly reported adverse events in healthcare settings.

What was done?

Connolly Hospital Blanchardstown launched a formal Medication Safety Programme in November 2017 by appointing a Medication Safety Facilitator and establishing a multidisciplinary Medication Safety Committee to promote and support the safe use of medications. The Medication Safety Committee undertook a number of activities to establish the programme in the hospital.

How was it done?

-An evidence-based literature review to define and guide the scope, breadth and direction of the programme. -A baseline in-depth analysis of locally reported medication incidents (2016/2017) on the National Incident Management System (NIMS) was conducted to identify initial targets for improvement. Analysis was undertaken using NCC-MERP, a recognised and validated tool used specifically for medication incidents. -An annual work-plan, incorporating necessary elements of a medication safety programme, was devised by the committee defining goals for the year.

What has been achieved?

Safety Culture: • Prominent commitment from hospital management to medication safety. • Investigations into medication errors aligned to a just and fair systems approach. • Promotion and encouragement of medication safety reporting and learning with a Medication Safety Awareness Day. • Implementation of the ‘Know, Check, Ask’ campaign to enhance medication safety by empowering patients. Governance: • Organogram updated to reflect reporting relationship of new committee. • Medication Safety made standing item at Quality & Safety Executive meetings. • Annual report submitted to Hospital Executive Committee Measurement & Monitoring of medication incidents: • Quarterly report produced and disseminated to front-line staff tracking and trending medication incidents including narratives. • Performance indicators established for: -No. of incidents reported (2018 reporting increased by 32% over 2017); -Reporter of incidents; -Category of harm; -Stage of medication use process where incidents have occurred. Education & Training: • Regular face-to-face education sessions arranged with front-line staff. • Quarterly medication safety bulletin devised and disseminated, informed by audit findings and incident reports. • The successful Medication Safety Minute initiative from St James’s Hospital was adopted and implemented, with content informed by local incidents. Development, Updating and Dissemination of PPPGs. • New IV drug administration guides (n=53) developed and updated. • Introduction of one-page ‘Medicines Information Sheet’ as quick reference guides for key topics. • DOAC prescription and administration guide developed and circulated. Audit: • Audit programme established informed by incident analysis, complaints and best-practice including introduction of an ‘audit window’ to gather hospital-wide data. Quality Improvement: • Informed by incident analysis, best-practice and audit findings, a number of moderate-high leverage quality improvement projects were initiated including removal of concentrated potassium from general clinical areas, introduction of an insulin & glucose monitoring record and introduction of an automated dispensing cabinet for out-of-hours access to medication.

What next?

The structural aspects established for the Medication Safety Programme have been successful in establishing a programme in the hospital and are reproducible by other centres.
Work continues in Connolly Hospital to identify themes of incidents, audit of practice and implementation of quality improvement initiatives.