The Potential Role of Smart Infusion Devices in Preventing or Contributing to Medication Administration Errors: A Descriptive Study of 2 Data Sets.

OBJECTIVES: Errors in medication administration are common, with many interventions suggested to reduce them. For intravenous infusion-related errors, "smart infusion devices" incorporating dose error reduction software are widely advocated. Our aim was to explore the role of smart infusion devices in preventing or contributing to medication administration errors using retrospective review of 2 complementary data sets that collectively included a wide range of errors with different levels of actual or potential harm. METHODS: We reviewed 216 medication administration errors identified from an observational study in clinical practice and 123 medication incidents involving infusion devices reported to a national reporting system. The impact of smart infusion devices in preventing or contributing to these errors was assessed by the research team and an expert panel. RESULTS: The data suggest that use of any infusion device rather than gravitational administration may have prevented 13% of observed errors and 8% of reported incidents; additional reductions may be possible with standalone smart infusion devices, and further potential reductions with smart infusion devices integrated with electronic prescribing and barcode administration systems. An estimated 52% to 73% of errors that occurred with traditional infusion pumps could be prevented with such integrated smart infusion devices. In the few cases where smart infusion devices were used, these contributed to errors in 2 of 58 observed errors and 7 of 8 reported incidents. CONCLUSIONS: Smart infusion devices not only prevent some medication administration errors but can also contribute to them. Further evaluation of such systems is required to make recommendations for policy and practice.

'You wouldn't do that to an animal, would you?' Ethical issues in managing pain in patients with substance dependence.

In this article, we present a secondary analysis of a descriptive phenomenological study that we conducted in the United Kingdom exploring nurses' experiences of working with patients with substance dependence and pain. Our aim was to focus upon the ethical issues that emerged in the empirical data and so we used the Four Principles of Biomedical Ethics plus attention to scope to guide and inform our analysis. We present six key themes: trust, paternalism, coercion, failure to respect autonomy, advocacy and withholding. We discuss how these themes intersect with the four principles plus scope to illuminate practice and the ethical issues that emerge when managing this patient population's pain. We recommend that clinicians adopt a collaborative approach to managing pain for patients with substance dependence that they remain aware of the power differentials inherent within the clinical setting and ensure that communication and teamwork remain at the forefront of decisions. Clinicians need access to ethical guidance to inform their practice decisions and clinical ethics support services could provide one solution.

Ketamine infusion for 96 hr after thoracotomy: Effects on acute and persistent pain.

INTRODUCTION: Pain which persists after thoracotomy is well recognized, and activation of the N-methyl-d-aspartate (NMDA) receptor could be a contributing factor. This study sought to establish whether ketamine given peri-operatively could reduce persistent post-surgical pain. TRIAL DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial comparing low-dose intravenous ketamine and saline placebo. METHODS: Seventy patients undergoing thoracotomy were randomized to receive either intravenous ketamine (0.1 mg kg-1  hr-1 ) or saline placebo for 96 hr, starting 10 min prior to surgery. A bolus dose of 0.1 mg/kg of ketamine/placebo was given prior to starting the infusion. Post-operative analgesia consisted of either an epidural infusion or patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), +/- a paravertebral infusion of local anaesthetic. Pain scores and opioid consumption were collected at 24 and 48 hr after surgery. Patients completed numeric pain scores (NPS), modified Brief Pain Inventory (BPI), the short form Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (S-Lanss) at baseline, 6 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months after surgery. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in post-operative pain, except the ketamine group reported less pain at rest 48 hr after surgery (p = 0.03). The ketamine group requested significantly less morphine via PCA in the first 24 hr (p = 0.03). There were no differences in pain measures or opioid consumption at 6 weeks, 3, 6 or 12 months. Patients in the ketamine group were more lightheaded (p = 0.02) and experienced more vivid dreams (p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine reduced opioid consumption compared to placebo after surgery, but we were unable to detect any differences in persistent post-surgical pain between the groups. SIGNIFICANCE: This study adds to the growing body of evidence advocating the use of ketamine to reduce opioid consumption. No previous studies of peri-operative ketamine have followed patients for a year after thoracotomy. This study found no reduction in persistent post-surgical pain.

Patient-controlled analgesia: what information does the patient want?

AIMS OF THE STUDY: To formulate and evaluate an information leaflet for patients using patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), incorporating information thought to be important by patients. RATIONALE: The benefit of current information leaflets, written by professionals, has not been studied and their value to patients is unknown. BACKGROUND: Previous studies have shown that information leaflets were poorly designed and written in language too difficult for patients to understand. RESEARCH METHODS: Seven focus groups were conducted to establish what information patients wanted to know about PCA. This information was incorporated into a new information leaflet. One hundred patients were randomized to receive either the new leaflet or the old leaflet in current use. A questionnaire was used to establish whether the new leaflet was more clear and informative than the old one. RESULTS: Patients wanted to know that the drug used in PCA was morphine. They wanted more information about side-effects, needed to be reassured that it was safe, and that they could not overdose or become addicted. They wanted detailed instructions and diagrams about the technique. The questionnaire study established that the new leaflet was clearer and more informative. CONCLUSION: Patients' contribution led to major change, producing a leaflet which was clearer, more attractive, more informative and which proved more satisfactory to patients.