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.

Author(s)

Cyril Magnan, Elise Betmont, Guillaume Saint Lorant, Hubert Benoist

Why was it done?

Evaluate the economic impact of improvement actions taken since 2017 on TSPs management.

What was done?

Cold chain is a major issue in the pharmaceutical industry as a growing number of its products are temperature-sensitive and also in hospitals. In 2017, 27 cold chain breaks were declared by care units (CU) within a French teaching hospital, resulting in a risk for patient care and a potential loss of 40,363 euros, of which 18,505 euros (45%) could be avoided. Following this first study, a set of measures have been implemented in our establishment in order to secure the cold chain.

How was it done?

Potential losses and avoided losses of TSPs have been analyzed continuously since 2017 according to the same methods in a teaching hospital with 1,600 beds. In case of a thermal excursion (ET), the pharmacy is, according to the institutional procedure, immediately warned by an electronic alarm day and night or by a call from the care service, making it possible to define the action required from the service concerning the methods of keeping TSPs.

What has been achieved?

Since 2017, a mobile isothermal enclosure has been implemented for the transport of TSPs during the day in the CU. Connected temperature-monitoring sensors have been installed on so-called “at-risk” refrigerators. The alarm reports to the pharmacy was instituted in order to intervene as quickly as possible. Part of the refrigerators has been renewed and awareness has been raised among all CUs for the good traceability of temperature readings, allowing a drop from 24% in 2018 to 65% of compliant traceability in 2019. Following these improvement actions, 53 ETs with a potential loss of 53,769 euros were declared in 2019, of which 39,753 euros of losses could be avoided. Currently, 74% of ET losses can be avoided compared to 43% in 2017.

What next?

This economic assessment of the potential losses and the avoided losses of PTs shows the positive impact of the various improvement measures taken since 2017 as well as education of the UDS to secure TSPs. A regional awareness was implemented thanks to a collaboration with the regional health agency in order to promote TSPs management in the hospitals.

Pdf

Author(s)

Rebeca Iglesias-Barreira, Emilio Rubén Pego-Pérez, Carlos Sandoval-Aquino, Cristina López-Pardo y Pardo, Maria Jesús Rodríguez-Gay

Why was it done?

To guarantee workers safety as well as optimize the use of PPE in the hospital.

What was done?

To develop a protocol for placement and removal of personal protective equipment (PPE), established for contact with possible or confirmed coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 infected patients, taking into account the medical devices (MD) available during the pandemic. Alternatives and strategies were also proposed for resources optimization. Final protocol resulted from a multidisciplinary team work (Hospital Pharmacy Service team and Emergency Service workers). It was finally revised and approved by the Medical and Quality Direction.

How was it done?

1)A systematic bibliographic review was made, for articles selection on the placement / removal of PPE. Technical specifications of the available MD and the sanitary recommendations of the competent organitations were reviewed.
2)Establishment of PPE components, and the order of placement and removal:
a. PPE placement:1-Wash hands (WH).2-Place shims.3-WH.4-Put on the first pair of gloves.5-Put on FFP2 mask.6-Wear waterproof protective overalls from the feet.7-Place garbage bags on feet and adjust them on legs.8-Wash gloves with a hydroalcoholic solution (HS).9-Put on second pair of gloves.10-Put on a standard/reinforced surgical gown.11-Wash HS.12-Put on surgical mask.13-Put on disposable gown.14-Put on third pair of gloves.15-Put on face protection screen. 16-Put on surgical cap and fit it over a face shield.
b. PPE removal: a) Before leaving the isolation room: 1-Remove and discard bags from both feet.2-Remove and discard disposable gown.3-Remove and discard the outermost gloves. b) Outside the isolation room: 1-Wash HS.2-Remove surgical cap and screen (reserve screen).3-Remove and discard surgical mask.4-Wash HS.5-Remove the standard/reinforced surgical gown and reserve it.6-Remove second pair of gloves.7-Wash HS.c) Before entering the clean area:1-Remove shoes.2-Remove third pair of gloves.d)Go to the clean area:1-Disinfect footwear.2-Wash HS.3-Remove monkey and if necessary reserve it. 4-Wash HS.5-Remove FFP2 mask and reserve it if necessary.6-WH.
c. A team member read and check all steps carried out during the all steps procedure.

What has been achieved?

The protocol was followed by 54 (100%) workers. Since its implantation, on March 16 th, only the 3,7% (n=2) of workers were infected by SARS-CoV-2.

What next?

The protocol is under constant revision and modification to adapt it to the available MD in every moment.

Pdf

Author(s)

Elodie Delavoipière, Marianne Pavard, Anne-Laure Richard, Julien Montreuil, Albane Cherel, Céline Bouglé

Why was it done?

Every year in our country, 10,000 preventable deaths and more than 130,000 preventable hospitalizations are related to drug misuse. This issue is a priority of the national health strategy. Therefore, we developed a CPD training program on the issues and methods of managing the risk of ME.

What was done?

A regional multi-disciplinary Continuing Professional Development (CPD) program was developed, dealing with the risk management of medication errors (ME).

How was it done?

This program was submitted to the National CPD Agency and accepted as a continuing education measure, corresponding to the national orientation: “control of risks associated with healthcare acts and pathways”. The program and the training materials were developed by a 13-member regional working group, including hospital pharmacists and quality managers, the drug observatory and the regional health quality network.

What has been achieved?

The training is intended for any health professional involved in the medication circuit in a health or medico-social institution: physicians, pharmacists, residents, nurses, pharmacy technicians… The first part is an e-learning slide presentation with voice commentary, on the theoretical aspects of ME and on the principles of a priori and a posteriori risk management. Concrete examples of ME are integrated throughout the slide presentation. This e-learning is divided into 4 parts and is accessible for 1 month. It must be validated by the learner before participating in the second part of the training: a face-to-face simulation session with 15 learners and 2 hospital trainers (pharmacist and health quality professional). During half a day, the learners apply a posteriori risk management by analysing a fictional adverse event (ME). The case addresses several themes: never events, drug reconciliation, city-hospital link, lack of communication, human factors. Questionnaires completed before, during and after the training allow for the evaluation of learners’ satisfaction as well as the impact of the training on their knowledge and skills.

What next?

This regional training will promote the link between actors from different institutions and the multi-disciplinary approach around the management of the risks of ME. In addition, we provide an awareness kit on ME reporting, including a customizable slide show and a quiz, which allows short sessions to be conducted in any health facility.

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.

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.

Pdf

Author(s)

Eva Heffernan, Deirdre Smith , Avril Tierney, Louise McDonnell

Why was it done?

Transitions of care such as hospital discharge present an opportunity for medication error. Lapses in communication at this interface are common. For the next healthcare provider (HCP) to issue the correct medication safely and in a timely manner, the discharge prescription needs to bridge this communication gap. Prescribing errors are the most frequent subtype of medication errors and can be repeated systematically for prolonged periods. Detection of medication error using tools such as audit, learning from these errors and planning corrective action is essential to building safer healthcare systems.
This study adapted the Health Information and Quality Authority (HIQA) national standard for patient discharge summaries to create a benchmark for discharge prescriptions in SVPH. A QI initiative targeting prescribers was developed. This was designed as a bundle intervention and was called the Discharge Prescription Education Bundle (DPEB).

What was done?

The aim of this project was to evaluate the current level of discrepancies on discharge prescriptions for surgical and medical patients and to ascertain if a quality improvement (QI) initiative can impact on the severity of medication error at the point of discharge.

How was it done?

Uncontrolled consecutive baseline and re-audit of discharge prescriptions on a 26-bed mixed medical and surgical ward. The baseline audit assessed 70 patients’ discharge prescriptions. Deviations from the standard were termed discrepancies. Discrepancies were divided based on capacity to cause error (NCC-MERP Category A) and error occurred (NCC-MERP Category B-I). Discrepancies where an error occurred (NCC-MERP Category B-I) were reported using the in-house medication incident reporting (MIR) system and dually assessed by an independent panel and the project lead for potential to cause harm. The QI initiative was implemented and its impact assessed with a re-audit of 70 patients’ discharge prescriptions.

What has been achieved?

The overall number of discrepancies reduced from 156 in the baseline to 59 in the re-audit (p<0.05). Overall compliance with the audit standards improved from 17.1% to 54.3% (p <0.05). In the baseline audit 22.8% (n=16) of patients had a discrepancy where an error occurred; this reduced to 2.65% (n=2) in the re-audit (p<0.05). The severity of errors reduced in the re-audit.

What next?

The QI initiative used was proactive not reactive. Use of the discharge education bundle was not restricted to pharmacy opening hours.
This initiative was very low cost to implement. Following on from the successful results of this project one component of DPEB called the discharge prescription visual prompt is now preprinted on all SVPH discharge prescriptions as a reminder to prescribers.

Pdf

Author(s)

José Marco-del Río, María Luisa Ibarra-Mira, Gregorio Romero-Candel, Ana Ramirez-Córcoles, Ana Valladolid-Walsh, Francisco Tomás Pagán-Nuñez

Why was it done?

Our main goal was to improve patient’s safety, because we noticed that many patients did not take actually all the drugs that were prescribed by the physicians, and other times there were drugs that the patients were taking because they had an active prescription, but they were not supposed to. Additionally, we aimed to improve the drug-related information that the patients take home.

What was done?

A programme which includes every patient admitted into the Internal Medicine department. It consists of three steps: clarification of chronic medication that the patients are taking, we handle them and updated schedule of their drugs upon discharge and we check the coherence with the active prescriptions.

How was it done?

We interview the patients during the admission in order to clarify and update the chronic medication that they are taking. When a patient is about to be discharged, the nurses call us, so at this moment we talk to the physician to know what changes are going to be made on the medication. To coordinate with the physicians and nurses, we had two meetings in which we established the timing of the programme, so the patients don’t have to wait too long for us. When we know the changes that the physician is going to make, we update the medication schedule to handle it to the patients or their family, and we explain to them the changes and how they should manage the new drugs. If any discrepancy or medication-related problem is detected, we talk to the physician to solve it.

What has been achieved?

In the last four months, we performed 180 discharges and we solved together with the physicians 20 discrepancies. Patients are now receiving more comprehensive information about their treatment.

What next?

To continue with the programme and broaden it to the rest of our hospital departments. Also we are working on a way of uploading our pharmacy schedules to the electronic medical record of the patients, so they can be available for every healthcare worker, which would improve even more the transitions of care.

Pdf

Author(s)

Noelia Vicente Oliveros, María Muñoz García, Álvaro Ruigomez Saiz, Montserrat Ferre Masferrer, Teresa Bermejo Vicedo, Eva Delgado Silveira, Lucía Quesada Muñoz, Ana María Alvarez-Diaz

Why was it done?

An analysis of the indicators of the perioperative process reflected the need to improve their quality. One of the causes of scheduled surgery cancellation was the lack of the follow up of the anaesthetist’s medication recommendations. Medications need to be carefully managed to prevent perioperative complications.

What was done?

We designed and implemented a flow chart to ensure the patient compliance of anesthetist’s medication recommendations prior to surgery. We designed a protocol for the perioperative medication management.

How was it done?

A multidisciplinary group was formed with the management of the hospital and representatives of all the services involved in the perioperative process. The group designed the flow chart of the process by consensus. Patients were candidates to enter in this process if they were on treatment with anticoagulant or 2 or more medications from the following groups: antiplatelet, antihypertensives, antidiabetics. A pharmacist called by phone three times (the day before, the day of medication change, and the day after) to the patient to ensure the compliance of anaesthetist recommendations. If there was a lack of compliance, the pharmacist contacted the surgeon who was in charge of deciding if the surgery procedure continued as scheduled. Moreover, the domiciliary medication of these patients were reconcilliated and recorded in their health record. Healthcare professionals could consult it during hospital stay. The group designed a protocol for the perioperative medication management with different medical specialists.

What has been achieved?

The project started in April 2019. The pharmacist called patients with scheduled surgery of lower limbs. A total of 31 patients benefited from the new flow chart. The pharmacist detected 38 medication errors; two involved errors concerning the suspension of anticoagulant drugs prior to surgery and four implied antihypertensive drugs. Once, it was necessary to contact the surgeon. In this case, the surgeon decided to continue with the surgery as schedule. Fifty-seven medications suffered a change in the period between the anaesthestic visit and the surgery, nine of them belonged to the monitored medication group. 

What next?

The next steps are to spread the flow chart to other patients, to distribute the protocol among hospital healthcare professionals and to implement a procedure for the reintroduction of the modified medication.

Pdf

Author(s)

Quentin HIVER, Agathe ROGER, Marine EGOT, Ivan VELLA, Marie-Hélène TYWONIUK

Why was it done?

Community and hospital pharmacists are required to apply the European directive on falsified medicines. In France, we are currently undergoing a transition phase for the progressive generalisation of serialisation. French pharmacies are more or less ahead of schedule for the implementation of decommissioning. In our pharmacy, the decommissioning has been operational since February 2019. After 8 months of practice, we are able to provide data as a basis for work and thinking.

What was done?

Determining and evaluating, by feedback approach, the organisational and economical impacts of drug serialisation for a hospital pharmacy

How was it done?

• Step-by-step description of the supply chain after implementation of decommissioning. • Collection of the man-hours necessary for: decommissioning implementation, software training, routine decommissioning, problem solving. • Census of financial investments

What has been achieved?

After analysis of our supply chain, the reception stage appeared to be the most favorable for decommissioning, in terms of practicality, safety and traceability. Several steps have thus been added at reception: Identification of serialized boxes, manual scan, checking of the decommissioning report and the number of decommissioned boxes, printing of the report. The pharmaceutical time necessary for the decommissioning implementation has been estimated to up to 28 hours. The software training was made in small groups of 2−3 agents, requiring 9 minutes per agent on average. The decommissioning is currently requiring 17 minutes for 100 boxes. Over 8 months, the time necessary for the pharmacists to solve problems linked with serialisation (non-operational Hub, corrupted database, error message at decommissioning…) was estimated to up to 7 hours. The financial investment amounts to 17200 euros (software+ergonomic desk+man-hours at implementation).

What next?

The decommissioning itself doesn’t have a major impact on the pharmacy’s organization. But, ensuring a clear and safe supply chain, to identify which boxes must be decommissioned and which boxes can be dispensed, is time-consuming. It goes through a proper working environment with a forward supply chain and traceability tools. Moreover, the encountered problems were mainly due to computer failures, requiring a performing software with an efficient maintenance. We are currently working on improving the ergonomics of the workstation to avoid the risk of musculoskeletal disorders due to decommissioning.