Author(s)

Álvaro Caballero Romero, Enrique Galindo Sacristán, Fernando Malpica Chica , Enriqueta González González, Ana María Manzano Bonilla, Marcos Camacho Romera

Why was it done?

Medication errors (ME) are often identified in transitions of patients at admission to and discharge from the hospital. Medication reconciliation at discharge is an effective process to decrease the morbidity, mortality and healthcare expenses.

What was done?

A protocol for a medication reconcialiation project was designed by hospital and primary health care pharmacists.

How was it done?

The protocol has the following steps. To identify all the patients from the hospital at discharge daily. To select the polimedicated (5 or more prescribed medicament) and elderly (over 65 years old) patients. To review the discharge report in the clinical history patient in order to compare whether doctor prescriptions of medicaments (medicine, dose, posology, duration) correspond to the prescriptions included in the report at discharge. To identify discrepancies between both the discharge report and doctor prescriptions of medicaments. The discrepancies were clasified in justified and unjustified. The unjustified discrepancies were categorised as omissions, unnecesary addition, wrong medications, wrong drug frequency/dose, duplicities, pharmacological interacctions and inappropiated medicine regarding to the current clinical practice guidelines. The discrepancies are classified as high and low priority. Finally, both types of discrepancias are reported by sending emails to the specific physicians for each patient along the primary health care system. Some specific cases are discussed on phone calls by doctors and the pharmacists in order to achieve the best clinical goal for the patient.

What has been achieved?

The project was evaluated from June 2016 to May 2017. Total of discharges: 2788. Included patients: 863. Patients with discrepancies: 309 (35%). Detected discrepancies: 470. Rate discrepancies/patient: 1.52. Omissions: 122 of 470. (25.96%). Unnecesary addition: 60 of 470 (12.76%). Wrong medicine: 3 (0.63%). Wrong frequency/dose: 167 (35.53%). Duplicities: 92 (19.57%). Pharmacological interactions: 13 (2.65%). Inappropiated medicine: 13 (2.77%). Reported emails: 309/309 (100%).

What next?

Polimedicated and over 65 years old patients play an extremely important role in the current health care systems. The ME are frequent and may be particullary severe in this type of patients. To develope a protocol for medication reconciliation at discharge in order to identify potencial prescriptions problems is an oppotunity for the multidisciplinar care team to improve the patient care and decrease the expenses associated to primary health care.

Author(s)

Mohammed Almeziny, Ali Alkhudair , Fahad Alkharji

Why was it done?

The Rule-of-Six has been used in hospitals for many years. in the last years it has been under investigations due to the variable concentrations that result when making the calculation to mix critical medication drips. The rule, or formula, multiplies a patient’s weight (Kg) by 6 to determine the dose of a medication (mg) to be added to an appropriate diluents for a total volume of 100 mL. The rate in mL/hr is equivalent to the dose in mcg/kg/min. Therefore, for each patient, there would be a different concentration infused, although the rate/dose would be the same. In addition, the drastic changes in a patient’s weight would require compounding a new drip.

What was done?

developed and implemented a standardised list of IV medication concentrations across a tertiary hospital to enhance medication safety.

How was it done?

A task group was formulated from all involved parties to standardise I.V. infusion concentrations. The task group adopted the following strategies: first strategy is enhancing safety through standardised and limited concentrations available, simplifies calculations and minimise its effect on fluid restriction patients. Second strategy the concentration should be broadly applicable through meets needs of 80-90% patients, frequently used in current practice and appropriate for peripheral as well as central lines and the third strategy is developing comprehensive IV references using guideline validated by expert review and stakeholder consensus, education and training of stakeholders, comprehensive drug information, appendices for specialty settings and populations (ICU, NICU etc) and index of commercially available ready to administer finally these strategies are subjected to periodic revision and update. Infusion charts were developed to facilitate use of standardised concentration

What has been achieved?

Within 9 months the task group were able to eliminate the rule of six and created a list of standardised IV concentration. The hospital has successfully implemented a standardised IV infusion concentrations. The multidisciplinary consensus was achieved. The list of standardised IV concentration meets patient safety goals and provides numerous safety features. In addition system is highly efficient on a day to day practice as well as it is highly adaptable to most patient groups.

What next?

The health information system will be used to calculate the infusion rate

Author(s)

Kaveh Teimori, Hannah Colldén, Reza Asasdian

Why was it done?

Hospitalized patients often need multiple intravenous drugs simultaneously which are commonly mixed in-line before entering the blood stream. Physicochemically incompatible drugs cause reduced efficacy, clogged catheters and drug precipitation, which can be harmful or even fatal. The risks add uncertainty to the stressful working environment for clinical practitioners. According to a local 2012 survey 68% (n=44) of Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SUH) intensive care unit (ICU) nurses had co-administered drugs uncertain of their compatibility. Hospital pharmacists are hence asked for guidance to optimize compatibility and patient safety.

What was done?

Nurses, doctors and pharmacists were provided with accessible and evidence based information on IV drug compatibility in order to improve drug therapy, working environment and patient safety.

How was it done?

Drug compatibility data was collected by hospital pharmacists who assessed its applicability to Swedish conditions. The results were documented in charts and procedure documents. A project for creating a database was initiated in collaboration with the IT organization in Västra Götaland Region (VGR). A survey was designed to evaluate how the SUH’s ICU nurses experienced the database. Collaboration with nurses, doctors and clinical pharmacists helped improving the quality of the database.

What has been achieved?

Drug compatibility lectures given to nurses, doctors, pharmacists on a continuous basis. Procedure documents implemented in eight clinics. A peer-reviewed work flow is established. The database contains over 2500 assessed drug combinations. Over 700 nurses, doctors and pharmacists from 11 counties plus Norway and Denmark have requested access to the database. Clinics avoid drug mixing by choosing multi-lumen catheters with greater capacity. The 2016 survey showed that 88% (n=86) of SUH’s ICU nurses had co-administered drugs uncertain of their compatibility. The database affected their decisions in 93% (n=45) of the cases, 85% (n=34) found information easier and 88% (n=34) felt more certain when making decisions. A new pharmacist role – IV Compatibility Manager – was introduced and implemented in VGR. In 2016, this work received the national annual award Guldpillret (“The Golden Pill”).

What next?

In the next years, the database will become nationally available and integrated into electronic journal systems. Compatibility issues may then be identified already when prescribing, further improving patient safety.

Pdf

Why was it done?

The implementation of safe medication practices plays a key role to prevent medication errors (ME) in the hospital setting. High-alert medications (HAMs) are those that bear a heightened risk of causing significant patient harm when they are used in error. Institutions such as the Joint Commission requires that hospitals define institution-specific HAMs and implement good processes.
Our objective was to ensure safe medication hospital practices and to eliminate medication errors that may cause harm, which is a priority to achieve patient´s safety goals.

What was done?

A program for identifying and handle high-alert medications in a terciary hospital has been implemented.

How was it done?

The project was carried out in different stages:
-First of all, it was consulted the updated list (published in 2012) by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Therefore, a total of 186 drugs were HAMs.
-The second step was identified them using auxiliary red colour labels to warn health professionals of their potential danger.
-Finally, we defined general and specific strategies to take up with HAMs. In general strategies, plant kits were reviewed to remove unnecessary stock and limiting access to HAMs. It was also standardized HAM handling practices. In this way, specific strategies focused on: methotrexate, insulin and heparin. Regarding methotrexate administered orally, it was distributed a fact sheet indicating rules to promote it proper administration. Regarding insulin, a working group was formed to determine the available presentations, reserving the insulin pen for diabetic debuts. For the unfractionated heparin, a procedure for standardized dilution of 5% heparin was performed being the 1% heparin restricted to certain services.

What has been achieved?

A total of 186 medications were identifyed as HAMs and different strategies to prevent ME with those was defined. The main objective we have accomplished is becoming aware of their potential danger in case of error.

What next?

In the near future, our main objetives are asses the long-term impact of the implemented strategies, monitor ME involving HAMs and reassess the current list of HAMs to promote a needed safety culture in the hospital setting.

Author(s)

MERCEDES GIMENO-GRACIA, TRANSITO SALVADOR-GOMEZ, ROSA MARECA, JOSE IGNACIO GARCIA-MONTERO, MIGUEL ANGEL SALVO, PILAR ABAD, BEATRIZ ABAD, CESAR VELASCO

Why was it done?

The Spanish Agency of Medicines and Health Products (AEMPS) issues drug and health product-related alerts to the health centres through each region’s Department of Health. The means through which said alerts reach the health professional is not always adequate. The procedures for alert dissemination in our hospital hadn’t been standardized yet: some professionals were alerted more tan once while others weren’t alerted at all. Furthermore, there was no record of these alerts

What was done?

We developed a safety alert management and dissemination system implementation in a hospital setting.

How was it done?

In April 2014, a multidisciplinary workgroup was established (3 members of the Preventive Medicine Service, 2 pharmacists, 2 members of the Supplies Service, 2 computer technicians and 2 members of the hospital’s Management) to analyse management and dissemination of alerts within the hospital at that time. Safety alerts can attain to different elements: drugs, medical devices and public health. Throughout 2015 new circuits and actions were established and in 2016 their implementation was initiated.

What has been achieved?

The workgroup held 7 meetings from April 2014 to June 2016. The project started focusing on drug-related alerts. An algorithm was designed to handle them, in which a pharmacist filtered the alerts (via e-mail) and assessed which had to be spread, and among which professionals. Additionally, the pharmacist managed the alert. The dissemination worked as follows: from the Pharmacy Service to Medical or Nursing Directors, who spread the message to the different units recommended by pharmacist, specifically to their respective Manager, Tutor of Residents and Quality Manager. All alerts were recorded in a database, along with how they were handled.
From January to June of 2016, a total of 235 drug-related alerts were sent from AEMPS. The dissemination was as follows: 44.3% (104) were spread among pharmacists, 36.6% among doctors, 5.5% among nurses and 9.4% to other professionals. The types of drug-alert received were classified as: supply problems (84.7%), use recommendations (7.2%), quality alerts (7.7%) and others (0.5%).

What next?

Next step is implantation of this alert management system with medical devices alerts and public health alerts.

Pdf

Author(s)

Gregorio Romero Candel, Esther Domingo Chiva, Nuria Martinez Monteagudo, Jose Marco del Rio, Marca Diaz Rangel, Francisca Sanchez Rubio, Ismael Perez Alpuente, Eva Garcia Martinez, Ana Valladolid Wals

Why was it done?

The ED is an area where medication errors are common given it´s complexity, the large number of patients with different pathologies, having to make quick decisions with little clinical information and the coexistence of professionals with different training.
The use of intravenous (IV) and high risk drugs, as well as the mixture of two or more intravenous drugs in the same diluent are usual and can lead to medication errors.
We designed an educational program based on a session for nurses of the ED to standardize the use of the most commonly administered drugs and improve patient safety

What was done?

A training session for nursing staff on safe drug administration in the emergency department (ED) was performed

How was it done?

A training session was conducted by the fourth year resident during a two month rotation period in this area. The most common mistakes were presented to nurses based on national studies, as well as techniques for safe administration of drugs. Guides on parenteral administration of the hospital were reviewed with special emphasis on high risk drugs and how to manage them according to the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. We also developed a guide including the most frequent drug incompatibilities and direct intravenous administration of drugs for the ED.

What has been achieved?

The aim of the session was to train personnel at the ED in order to reduce medication errors and promote a safety culture. In turn, the development of guidelines to standardize clinical practice are useful, making information accessible and easy to use. Clinical sessions between departments allow the integration of the pharmacist in other areas.

What next?

We are still working with the ED to increase safety in drug therapy by developing new pharmacotherapeutic protocols (high risk medications protocols, perfusion protocols and new safety guidelines and training sessions). We are also working with more departments at our hospital with the experienced gained

Author(s)

Sophia Elizabeth Campbell Davies, Elena Galfrascoli, Tommaso Saporito, Gaetana Muserra

Why was it done?

Spontaneous reporting is an important tool for the surveillance of drug safety. However, the number of reported ADRs by Hospital healthcare workers and patients was below the gold standard (300 reports/year). Since under-reporting is a major limitation of any Pharmacovigilance system, the causes were analysed by the Pharmacy and a number of actions were put into place.

What was done?

Active strategies were implemented by Pharmacists within the Hospital to raise awareness and encourage appropriate detection and reporting of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs).

How was it done?

Different active strategies have been implemented in the Hospital to increase the number of ADR reports:
-Training and educational programs for all healthcare professionals in order to create awareness within the Hospital of the importance of ADR reporting;
-Periodic ADR feedback reports to doctors;
-Guidelines for monitoring, detecting, preventing and reporting ADRs;
-Participation of Clinical Pharmacists in different ward teams (Internal Medicine, Diabetology, Oncology, Paediatrics, Emergency Room, Surgery) allowing Pharmacists to act immediately on problem recognition;
-Counseling patients when drugs are dispensed at the Hospital Pharmacy and providing them with “Patient Information Leaflets” containing adherence and ADR diaries. The monitoring tool has been shown to be a crucial element in raising awareness about compliance and ADRs in patients.
A successful example has been obtained with DAA treatment in HCV patients showing a 63% compliance to the monitoring tool.

What has been achieved?

A significant increase has been observed in ADR reporting in the Hospital. Projects implemented by the Pharmacy have almost trebled the number of reports. There has also been an increase in the number of reported severe ADRs.

What next?

Implementation of different approaches has significantly changed the scenario of ADR reporting in our Hospital. The strategies could be transferred into other healthcare settings by identifying the causes of underreporting ADRs and applying similar strategies both in the Pharmacy and in the ward settings.

Pdf

Author(s)

Nadia El Hilali Masó, Elvira Ramió Montero, Gemma Baronet Jordana, Marina De temple Pla, Paula Montoliu Alcon, Maria Jaume Gaya, Núria Pi Sala, Joan Altimiras Ruiz, Montserrat Pons Busoms

Why was it done?

The confusion between drug names represents a common cause of medication errors due to similarities between trade names and active ingredients or vice versa. Very new drugs coexisting with others that are very well known can easily induce errors in wards, unclear prescription may lead to misunderstanding of prescription.

What was done?

Development and implementation of measures to improve patient’s safety from purchase to drug prescription and administration.When we switch to a new provider maybe forced by drug shortage, we perform a review to avoid medication errors in all dosage forms.If needed, we elaborated alerts (pharmalerts) and newsletters. We applied Tall Man letters (TML) method to manage look-alike and sound-alike drugs, and to reduce prescription errors we elaborated a “Best practices on drug prescription” validated by Commission of pharmacy.

How was it done?

We prepared a formulary online on the intranet where pharmacist introduces relevant drug information as composition (i.e, excipients, contents latex or not, etc.), dilution, stability, source of errors (name, brand name,etc) among others. We compare them with existing ones to take an action, if necessary, that will be spread to all professionals. To implement TML method we followed the ISMP recommendations. First, we selected 3 antibiotics: cefOTAXime, cefAZOLin, cefTRIAXone. We changed these names in the prescription program so that the differentiation is reflected when drugs are prescribed, dispensed and administered. The implementation was explained to pharmacy, nursery and medical staff.After a month, we evaluated its acceptance.

What has been achieved?

We reviewed 61 new products: 50 trademarks, 14 new drugs and 7 dosage forms. 70.48% of products, acquired temporally or permanently, were new trademarks; 19.71% new drugs and 9.81% new dosage forms. The review is a good tool for a safe use of drugs and improves communication between healthcare providers. To evaluate TML implementation 240 questionnaires were completed: Acceptance was 92.05% (nursery and medical staff). 91.17% thought that it is possible to make a mistake with look-alike or sound-alike drugs and 68.72% that TML is useful to minimise medication errors.

What next?

The huge acceptance of TML encourages us to select other drugs from ISMP list. We have 6 pairs of drugs. We are planning to extend its use to storage shelves on wards.

Pdf

Author(s)

Charlotte Ménage, Mickaël Le Barbu, Adrien Borowik, Christine Housset, Sandrine Voisin, Florence Lémann, Jean-Michel Descoutures

Why was it done?

An audit of the medication storage cabinets was performed in 2015 in 19 care units. Over a three month period, more than 5000 inappropriate medecines were found which are likely to alter the process of pillboxes prepation by the nurses. Our objective was to develop a training program for nurses to identify and avoid near miss events during the medication administration process.

What was done?

A simulation learning program for nurses was implemented to secure the drug pillboxes preparation.

How was it done?

A multiprofessional team (i.e., pharmacist, physician, pharmacist resident, head nurse, risk manager, hospital hygienist) collaboratively developed a simulation-based workshop. Two mobile cabinets were designed. They were composed of 28 medicine boxes, a patient pillbox and a laptop with a mock prescription. They included the use of a simulation scenario with errors (e.g., expired tablets, damaged blister packs, mixed pharmaceutical forms or dosages, non-formulary drugs). The nurses had to prepare the patient’s pillbox for one day and then were asked to solve five questions about good practices. A validated assessment grid was filled in by two team members, and finally discussed with the nurse about the successes and pitfalls as an education purpose. At the end of the simulation program, nurses had to answer a satisfaction survey.

What has been achieved?

47 nurses experienced the simulation-based workshop. It took 40 min for each nurse on the same week. 89% removed the deteriorated tablets remaining in the pillbox and did not unpack any unit dose. However, 81% were unable to prepare the right medicine, the right dose, the right route for the right patient at the right time, because of a lack of patient identification on the pillbox. Some critical procedures were considered not appropriately followed: i.e., detecting acetaminophen prescription duplicate (only 26%), throwing away medicines in the right disposable bin (21%), checking the tablet expiry dates (70%), using a drug for which the patient was not allergic (62%). The 47 nurses were all together satisfied (100%) with this workshop.

What next?

The simulation based program was adopted by the hospital department of nurse care. It is now integrated in the yearly re-assessment skills program of all nurses.

Author(s)

PALOMA CRESPO-ROBLEDO, MARIA SEGURA BEDMAR, IRENE ESCRIBANO VALENCIANO, NURIA BLAZQUEZ-RAMOS, BEATRIZ MARTIN CRUZ, CARMEN MORIEL SANCHEZ

Why was it done?

Patient safety is an essential component of quality care. It’s known that EDs are an element of risk for the onset of adverse events due to conditions related to patients’ comorbidity, communication problems, medication errors and working conditions like limited information about the patient, workload, interruptions, shifts, etc. It was detected that reconciliation of medication was not performed; neither validation of the medication prescribed and medications were stocked with no order and control.

What was done?

A project was developed to increase patient safety in the Emergency Department (ED) based on the presence of a hospital pharmacist in the team.

How was it done?

First thing was to review and validate the medication prescribed in patients who were under observation, at the same time performing a reconciliation given their acute situation. This way a relationship between nurses, physicians, patients and pharmacist was established.
Then, electronic prescription software was integrated within the automated dispensing cabinet (ADC), eliminating potential errors choosing the right drug. Only when a pharmacist has checked the medication, the list appears in the display and can be taken out all at once. The main problem has been to agree the stocks and how nurses can return easily and operatively the medication in order to not accumulate it out of the ADC.

What has been achieved?

Pharmacists’ clinical figure is being disclosed in a country where Hospital Pharmacy is a central and close department. In 43 days, 428 patients got their prescription checked in the ED, 346 pharmaceutical interventions were made in 198 patients, a median (IQR) average of 1 (1,2) interventions per patient. The main reason for an intervention was the adequacy to pharmaceutical forms included in the Hospital(n=130), followed by reconciliation interventions(n=77). Category of errors detected were mostly B (NCC MERP), showing pharmacists can detect an error occurred but that did not reach the patient

What next?

Hospital pharmacists should show their clinical and logistic potential, fighting with other health professionals to increase safety and care in patients. ED is the entrance of patients into the health system and where more errors can be committed, the work of a pharmacist should start at ED to prevent errors and give support and be part of the team.