Development and prioritisation of policy recommendations for medication safety improvement for intensive care units: a European Association of Hospital Pharmacists Special Interest Group Delphi Study.

OBJECTIVES: Medication errors (MEs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in the healthcare system. Patients admitted to intensive care units (ICUs) are potentially more susceptible to MEs due to severity of illness, the complexity of treatments they receive and the challenging nature of the ICU setting. The European Association of Hospital Pharmacists established a Special Interest Group (SIG) to undertake a programme of work to develop and prioritise recommendations to support medication safety improvement in ICUs across Europe. METHODS: Initial policy recommendations for medication safety within the ICU environment were developed following reviews of the literature and engagement with relevant stakeholders. A Delphi panel of 21 members of the SIG, that comprised healthcare professionals (HCPs) with expertise in ICU and/or medication safety, was convened in 2022. We conducted two rounds using a modified Delphi technique whereby participants anonymously ranked on a 9-point Likert Scale the policy recommendations according to their priority for implementation. RESULTS: In total, 32 policy recommendations were developed. In Delphi Round 1, 19 HCPs participated; consensus was achieved on most recommendations and partial consensus on six. In Delphi Round 2, 18 HCPs participated. After two Delphi rounds, consensus was achieved on all 32 recommendations. All recommendations were considered 'high priority' except one that was considered 'medium priority'. CONCLUSIONS: Through this study it was possible to develop and prioritise evidence-based policy recommendations to enhance medication safety, which may contribute to reducing MEs in ICUs across Europe. All recommendations were considered 'high priority' for implementation except one, indicating the perceived value of these recommendations in improving medication safety through preventing MEs in ICUs.

Exploring the Role of Guidelines in Contributing to Medication Errors: A Descriptive Analysis of National Patient Safety Incident Data.

INTRODUCTION: Clinical guidelines can contribute to medication errors but there is no overall understanding of how and where these occur. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to identify guideline-related medication errors reported via a national incident reporting system, and describe types of error, stages of medication use, guidelines, drugs, specialties and clinical locations most commonly associated with such errors. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of reports to the National Reporting and Learning System for England and Wales. A hierarchical task analysis (HTA) was developed, describing expected practice when using guidelines. A free-text search was conducted of medication incident reports (2016-2021) using search terms related to common guidelines. All identified reports linked to moderate-severe harm or death, and a random sample of 5100 no/low-harm reports were coded to describe deviations from the HTA. A random sample of 500 cases were independently double-coded. RESULTS: In total, 28,217 reports were identified, with 608 relating to moderate-severe harm or death. Fleiss' kappa for interrater reliability was 0.46. Of the 5708 reports coded, 642 described an HTA step discrepancy (including four linked to a death), suggesting over 3200 discrepancies in the entire dataset of 28,217 reports. Discrepancies related to finding guidelines (n = 300 reports), finding information within guidelines (n = 166) and using information (n = 176). Discrepancies were most frequently identified for guidelines produced by a local organisation (n = 405), and most occurred during prescribing (n = 277) or medication administration (n = 241). CONCLUSION: Difficulties finding and using information from clinical guidelines contribute to thousands of prescribing and medication administration incidents, some of which are associated with substantial patient harm.

Validation of a method to assess the severity of medication administration errors in Brazil.

INTRODUCTION: Medication errors are frequent and have high economic and social impacts; however, some medication errors are more likely to result in harm than others. Therefore, it is critical to determine their severity. Various tools exist to measure and classify the harm associated with medication errors; although, few have been validated internationally. METHODS: We validated an existing method for assessing the potential severity of medication administration errors (MAEs) in Brazil. Thirty healthcare professionals (doctors, nurses and pharmacists) from Brazil were invited to score 50 cases of MAEs as in the original UK study, regarding their potential harm to the patient, on a scale from 0 to 10. Sixteen cases with known harmful outcomes were included to assess the validity of the scoring. To assess test-retest reliability, 10 cases (of the 50) were scored twice. Potential sources of variability in scoring were evaluated, including the occasion on which the scores were given, the scorers, their profession and the interactions among these variables. Data were analysed using generalisability theory. A G coefficient of 0.8 or more was considered reliable, and a Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess test-retest reliability. RESULTS: To obtain a generalisability coefficient of 0.8, a minimum of three judges would need to score each case with their mean score used as an indicator of severity. The method also appeared to be valid, as the judges' assessments were largely in line with the outcomes of the 16 cases with known outcomes. The Bland-Altman analysis showed that the distribution was homogeneous above and below the mean difference for doctors, pharmacists and nurses. CONCLUSION: The results of this study demonstrate the reliability and validity of an existing method of scoring the severity of MAEs for use in the Brazilian health system.

Hospital pharmacists', doctors' and nurses' perceptions of intra- and inter- professional communication in the context of electronic prescribing and medication administration systems: A qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Effective, integrated and coordinated communication is essential in providing high quality patient care. Little prior research has detailed the impact of electronic prescribing and medication administration (ePMA) systems on healthcare professionals' (HCPs') communication. We investigated hospital pharmacists', doctors' and nurses' perceptions of how ePMA systems have affected, or are expected to affect, the way they communicate with each other in an inpatient setting. METHODS: A qualitative study in three English NHS hospitals: two used different inpatient ePMA systems, and one used paper-based prescribing. We conducted focus groups with pharmacists, and semi-structured individual interviews with doctors and nurses. Transcribed data were analysed inductively using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Nine focus groups, three at each hospital, were conducted with pharmacists with different levels of seniority (58 pharmacists in total). Fourteen doctors and twelve nurses took part in individual interviews. Four themes were generated: modes of communication, reduced pharmacist visibility, system limitations, and future aspirations for ePMA. Whether working with ePMA or paper-based systems, all participants preferred to communicate face-to-face to facilitate collaborative discussions regarding patient care. Participants perceived that ePMA reduced contact time with patients. Pharmacists perceived that both their physical ward presence and their written communication on medication charts had reduced since introduction of ePMA. Doctors felt they were now less likely to ask pharmacists questions due to pharmacists' reduced physical presence on the ward. Hardware and software limitations were identified by all HCPs, with suggestions made for future developments to better support communication. CONCLUSION: ePMA does not necessarily support communication among HCPs. Pharmacists and doctors were also concerned that ePMA reduces communication between themselves and their patients. Hospital managers should ensure sufficient hardware for HCPs, including pharmacists, to conduct their work in clinical areas, and work with ePMA system suppliers to develop ways of enhancing, rather than inhibiting, communication.

Understanding the facilitators and barriers to barcode medication administration by nursing staff using behavioural science frameworks. A mixed methods study.

INTRODUCTION: Barcode medication administration (BCMA) technology helps ensure correct medications are administered by nursing staff through scanning of patient and medication barcodes. In many hospitals scanning rates are low, limiting the potential safety benefits. We aimed to explore the barriers and facilitators to BCMA use in a London hospital. METHODS: In this mixed methods study we used local quantitative data on BCMA scanning rates to identify clinically similar wards (in terms of patient acuity and workload) with different scanning rates for qualitative exploration. Interviews designed to elicit barriers to using BCMA technology were conducted with nursing staff, supported by observations of medication administration. Qualitative data were analysed inductively and a thematic framework constructed housing key themes, subsequently categorised into barriers and facilitators. To explore patient perspectives of BCMA scanning, a purposive sample of patients were also interviewed. These patient data were analysed deductively according to the thematic framework. Themes were mapped to behavioural science frameworks to further understand the behaviours involved. RESULTS: BCMA was operational on 15 wards, with only six having medication scan rates of more than 10% of scannable doses. Of three wards selected for qualitative investigation, the lowest scan rate was 6.7%. Twenty-seven nurses and 15 patients were interviewed. Eleven key themes were identified, encompassing both barriers and facilitators to BCMA use. Barriers included poor trolley ergonomics and perceived time inefficiency. Facilitators included a streamlined process and thorough training. All nurses described BCMA as positive for patient safety. Patients described BCMA as making them "feel safer". Behavioural science frameworks highlighted the importance of professional role and an individual's belief in their capability. CONCLUSION: We present a novel exploration of facilitators and barriers to BCMA use from the viewpoint of both patients and nursing staff, highlighting a strong perception that BCMA enhances safety. Barriers were reported on both high and low usage wards, demonstrating the importance of behaviours and motivations. These findings provide a detailed understanding from which to design interventions to support behaviour change and increase BCMA use.

Indication documentation and indication-based prescribing within electronic prescribing systems: a systematic review and narrative synthesis.

BACKGROUND: Despite recommendations, documentation of indication on prescriptions and inpatient medication orders is not routinely practised. There has been a recent systematic review of indication documentation for antimicrobials, but not for interventions relating to indication documentation for medication more broadly. Our aims were to 1) identify, describe and synthesise the literature relating to effectiveness of interventions aimed at improving indication documentation and/or indication-based prescribing in both primary and secondary healthcare; 2) synthesise participant perspectives to identify barriers and facilitators to these interventions; and 3) make recommendations for both practice and research. METHODS: A systematic literature search was conducted using Medline, Embase and CINAHL using two search concepts: electronic prescribing systems, and indication documentation and/or indication-based prescribing. Qualitative, quantitative and mixed-methods studies were included; outcome measures and results were extracted to produce a narrative synthesis. Quality appraisal by two independent reviewers was undertaken using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. RESULTS: We identified 21 studies evaluating interventions to aid indication documentation. Indication documentation was either via free-text, selection from a list, or by use of pre-defined indication-based order sentences for individual medications. For a number of outcomes, there was a mostly positive impact, including appropriateness of the medication order (6 of 8 studies), rates of prescribing error (2/2) and some less commonly reported clinical (2/4) and workflow-related outcomes (2/3). There was a less favourable impact on accuracy of indication documentation and rates of medication use, highlighting some unintended consequences that may occur when implementing new interventions. Participant insights from prescribers and other healthcare professionals complemented quantitative study results, highlighting both facilitators and barriers to indication documentation and the associated interventions. For example, barriers included long drop-down lists and the need to use workarounds to navigate approval systems due to time or knowledge constraints. Facilitating factors included the perceived benefits of indication documentation on communication among the healthcare team and with the patient. CONCLUSION: Indication documentation has the potential to improve appropriate prescribing and reduce prescribing errors. However, further benefits to the prescriber, multidisciplinary team and patient may only be realised by developing methods of indication documentation that integrate more efficiently with prescriber workflows. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021278495.

A scoping review of non-professional medication practices and medication safety outcomes during public health emergencies.

OBJECTIVES: Public health emergencies (PHE) can disrupt personal medication practices and increase the risk of medication-related harm and other negative medication-related outcomes. Our aim was to examine the extent and nature of published research on this topic to guide future research and practice. STUDY DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: Standard electronic databases were searched. PRISMA-ScR guidelines were followed. Extracted data were organised in response to review questions and narrative accounts developed. RESULTS: A total of 129 studies were included, conducted across 32 countries, mostly in the USA (n = 42). Sixty-eight (53%) reported on infectious events, 49 (39%) climatological or ecological events and the remainder a mixture of terrorism, war or other disasters. The studies described several medication safety outcomes (medication-related harm, adherence, supply) and adaptive medication practices (self-altering prescribed medications, sharing medications and changing healthcare providers). Challenges to maintaining routine medication practices during a PHE included transport, finance, quarantine and knowledge-related issues. Twenty-eight studies (22%) examined health inequalities pertaining to adverse medication-related outcomes, with findings suggesting that gender, age, ethnicity, educational and socio-economic status may be related to inequalities. Research gaps identified included carers', children's and minority communities' experiences and intervention studies. CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable evidence of disruptions to routine personal medication practices during PHEs and of medication-related harm and other negative outcomes. Maintaining medication supply for the management of chronic conditions is a universal problem across all emergency types. Research is needed to address these disruptions, particularly amongst people who experience health inequalities who may need additional support.

Automatic dispensing cabinets and governance of controlled drugs: an exploratory study in an intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Governance of controlled drugs (CDs) in hospitals is resource intensive but important for patient safety and policy compliance. OBJECTIVES: To explore whether and how storing CDs in an automated dispensing cabinet (ADC) in a children's hospital intensive care unit (ICU) contributes to the effectiveness and efficiency of CD governance. METHODS: We conducted a mixed-methods exploratory study, comprising observations, interviews and audits, 3 months after ADC implementation. We observed 54 hours of medications activities in the ICU medication room (with 42 hours of timed data); interviewed nurses (n=19), management (n=1) and pharmacy staff (n=3); reviewed 6 months of ICU incident reports pertaining to CD governance; audited 6 months of CD register data and extracted logs of all ADC transactions for the 3 months following implementation. Data analysis focused on four main CD governance activities: safekeeping/controlling access, documenting use, monitoring, and reporting/investigating. RESULTS: Nurses and pharmacists perceived spending less time on CD governance tasks with the ADC. The ADC supported CD governance through automated documentation of CD transactions; 'blind counts'; automated count discrepancy checks; electronic alerts and reporting functionalities. It changed quality and distribution of governance tasks, such as removing the requirement for 'nurses with keys' to access CDs, and allowing pharmacists to generate reports remotely, rather than reviewing registers on the ward. For CDs in the ADC, auditing and monitoring appeared to be ongoing rather than periodic. Such changes appeared to create positive reinforcing loops. However, the ADC also created challenges for CD governance. Most importantly, it was not suitable for all CDs, leading to workarounds and parallel use of a safe plus paper registers. CONCLUSIONS: ADCs can significantly alter CDs governance in clinical areas. Effects of an ADC on efficiency and effectiveness of governance tasks appear to be complex, going beyond simple time savings or more stringent controls.

Learning from electronic prescribing errors: a mixed methods study of junior doctors' perceptions of training and individualised feedback data.

OBJECTIVES: To explore the views of junior doctors towards (1) electronic prescribing (EP) training and feedback, (2) readiness for receiving individualised feedback data about EP errors and (3) preferences for receiving and learning from EP feedback. DESIGN: Explanatory sequential mixed methods study comprising quantitative survey (phase 1), followed by interviews and focus group discussions (phase 2). SETTING: Three acute hospitals of a large English National Health Service organisation. PARTICIPANTS: 25 of 89 foundation year 1 and 2 doctors completed the phase 1 survey; 5 participated in semi-structured interviews and 7 in a focus group in phase 2. RESULTS: Foundation doctors in this mixed methods study reported that current feedback provision on EP errors was lacking or informal, and that existing EP training and resources were underused. They believed feedback about prescribing errors to be important and were keen to receive real-time, individualised EP feedback data. Feedback needed to be in manageable amounts, motivational and clearly signposting how to learn or improve. Participants wanted feedback and better training on the EP system to prevent repeating errors. In addition to individualised EP error data, they were positive about learning from general prescribing errors and aggregated EP data. However, there was a lack of consensus about how best to learn from statistical data. Potential limitations identified by participants included concern about how the data would be collected and whether it would be truly reflective of their performance. CONCLUSIONS: Junior doctors would value feedback on their prescribing, and are keen to learn from EP errors, develop their clinical prescribing skills and use the EP interface effectively. We identified preferences for EP technology to enable provision of real-time data in combination with feedback to support learning and potentially reduce prescribing errors.

Developing Strategic Recommendations for Implementing Smart Pumps in Advanced Healthcare Systems to Improve Intravenous Medication Safety.

Avoidable harm associated with medication is a persistent problem in health systems and the use of preprogrammed infusion devices ('smart pumps') and data monitoring is seen as a core approach to mitigating and reducing the incidence of these harms. However, smart pumps are costly to procure, configure and maintain (in both human and financial terms) and are often poorly implemented. Variation in the manner in which medicines are prepared and used within complex modern healthcare systems exacerbates these challenges, and a strategic human-centred approach is needed to support their implementation. A symposium of 36 clinical and academic medication safety experts met virtually to discuss the current 'state of the art' and to propose strategic recommendations to support the implementation of medication administration technology to improve medication safety. The recommendations were that health systems (1) standardise infusion concentrations to facilitate the development of ready-to-administer formulations of frequently used medicines, and support 'out of the box' programming of infusion devices; (2) develop and implement drug libraries using human-centred approaches and the aforementioned standard concentrations, with a theoretical understanding of how devices are used in practice; (3) develop standardised metrics and outcomes to support the interpretation of data produced by infusion devices; (4) involve all stakeholders in the development of drug libraries and metrics to ensure broad understanding of the devices, their benefits and limitations; and (5) leverage input into device design, working with manufacturers and users. Using this strategic approach, it is then possible to envisage and plan real-world implementation studies using a uniform approach to quantify improvements in safety, efficiency and cost effectiveness.

Retrospective descriptive assessment of clinical decision support medication-related alerts in two Saudi Arabian hospitals.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of clinical decision support system (CDSS) medication-related alerts generated, accepted, or overridden, to assess appropriateness of alert display and overrides, and to characterise the documentation of clinician justification for these overrides in an academic medical centre in Saudi Arabia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: System-generated CDSS reports for the period June 2015 to December 2017 were retrospectively reviewed and analysed. Alerts were classified into different types, and rates of alert overrides calculated as percentages of all generated alerts. A subset of 307 overridden alerts was assessed for appropriateness of display and override by two clinical pharmacists. Physician documentation of reasons for overriding alerts were categorised. RESULTS: A total of 4,446,730 medication-related alerts were generated from both inpatient and outpatient settings, and 4,231,743 (95.2%) were overridden. The most common alert type was 'duplicate drug', accounting for 3,549,736 (79.8%) of alerts. Of 307 alerts assessed for appropriateness, 246 (80%) were judged to be appropriately displayed and 244 (79%) were overridden appropriately. New drug allergy and drug allergy alerts had the highest percentage of being judged as inappropriately overridden. For 1,594,313 alerts (37.7%), 'no overridden reason selected' was chosen from the drop-down menu. CONCLUSIONS: The alert generation and override rate were higher than reported previously in the literature. The small sample size of 307 alerts assessed for appropriateness of alert display and override is a potential limitation. Revision of the CDSS rules for alerts (focusing on specificity and relevance for the local context) is now recommended. Future research should prospectively assess providers' perspectives, and determine patient harm associated with overridden alerts.

User Testing to Improve Retrieval and Comprehension of Information in Guidelines to Improve Medicines Safety.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to investigate the effectiveness of user testing for improving healthcare professionals' retrieval and comprehension of information in medicines guidelines. METHODS: The United Kingdom's Injectable Medicines Guide was selected as a case study. This gives guidance to nurses on preparing and administering intravenous medicines on hospital wards, in line with standard UK practice. Three rounds of user testing were completed with 10 hospital nurses per round, using the Injectable Medicines Guide for voriconazole and aminophylline. Participants used the guidelines to answer 17 questions related to the administration of these medicines. Answers were scored for "finding" and "understanding" the required information. Semistructured interviews explored participants' opinions of guideline content, design, and wording, with responses analyzed thematically. The guidelines were revised between rounds. RESULTS: In round 1, 8 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Participants had difficulty with dose, dilution, administration rate, and adverse effects questions. Revisions included new subsections and increased calculation support. In round 2, 14 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Difficulty persisted with dose and administration rate questions and further revisions made. In round 3, 15 of 17 questions were answered correctly by all participants. Across all rounds, participants considered appropriate subheadings and information order as important for fast location of information. Specific, detailed, and practical instructions were perceived as important to improve understandability and usefulness. CONCLUSIONS: Key information in medicines guidelines may not be found and/or understood by healthcare professionals. User testing increased information retrieval and comprehension and could have an important role in improving the safety of medicines use.

To What Extent Is the World Health Organization's Medication Safety Challenge Being Addressed in English Hospital Organizations? A Descriptive Study.

OBJECTIVES: Our study aimed to explore to what extent the priority areas and domains of the World Health Organization (WHO)'s third Global Patient Safety Challenge were being addressed in a sample of hospital organizations. METHODS: A qualitative approach was taken using a combination of focus groups, semistructured interviews, and documentary analysis in 4 UK teaching hospital organizations. A purposive sampling strategy was adopted with the aim of recruiting health care professionals who would be likely to have knowledge of medication safety interventions that were being carried out at the hospital organizations. Medication safety group meeting notes from 2017 to 2019 were reviewed at the hospital organizations to identify interventions recently implemented, those currently being implemented, and plans for the future. A content analysis was undertaken using the WHO's third Global Patient Safety Challenge priority areas and domains as deductive themes. RESULTS: All the domains and priority areas of the WHO Medication Safety Challenge were being addressed at all 4 sites. However, a greater number of interventions focused on "health care professionals" and "systems and practices of medication management" than on "patients and the public." In terms of the priority areas, the main focus was on "high-risk situations," particularly high-risk medicines, with fewer interventions in the areas of "transitions of care" and "polypharmacy." CONCLUSIONS: More work may be needed to address patient and public involvement in medication safety and the priority areas of transitions of care and polypharmacy. Comparative global studies would help build an international picture and allow shared learning.

Patient satisfaction with medication consultations and medicines information provided by nurses working autonomously in sexual health services: A questionnaire study.

AIM: To compare the satisfaction of patients managed by independent nurse prescribers with that of patients managed by nurses using PGDs with respect to experience of the consultation and information received about the medication. DESIGN: Survey. METHODS: Patients receiving medications from nurses in five urban sexual health services in the United Kingdom completed validated questionnaires immediately after the consultation, September 2015-August 2016. Scores of independent nurse prescribers and nurses using patient group directions were compared about consultation experience (5 items) Satisfaction with Information about Medicines (SIMS 16 items scale). RESULTS: Of 808 patients receiving medications, 393 (48.6%) received questionnaires and 380 were returned (independent nurse prescribers 180 of 198, 90.9%; patient group directions 173 of 195, 88.7%). Patients in both groups reported high levels of satisfaction. About the consultation experience, patients found nurses friendly/ approachable (>99%), instilling confidence and trust (>99%) and explaining reasons for medications clearly (97%). Satisfaction with medication information: Of 348 (92%) respondents completing SIMS, the overall mean score was 13.4 of maximum 16 (no difference between groups, t-test, p = .63). CONCLUSIONS: Patients were highly satisfied with nurse consultations and information around medications regardless of whether they were managed by independent nurse prescribers or nurses using patient group directions. IMPACT: Findings provide evidence in support of autonomous provision of medications by nurses in sexual health clinics.

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of User-Testing of Health Professionals' Guidelines to Reduce the Frequency of Intravenous Medicines Administration Errors by Nurses in the United Kingdom: A Probabilistic Model Based on Voriconazole Administration.

AIM: In the UK, injectable medicines are often prepared and administered by nurses following the Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG). Our earlier study confirmed a higher frequency of correct administration with user-tested versus standard IMG guidelines. This current study aimed to model the cost-effectiveness of user-testing. METHODS: The costs and cost-effectiveness of user-testing were explored by modifying an existing probabilistic decision-analytic model. The adapted model considered administration of intravenous voriconazole to hospital inpatients by nurses. It included 11 error types, their probability of detection and level of harm. Model inputs (including costs) were derived from our previous study and other published data. Monte Carlo simulation using 20,000 samples (sufficient for convergence) was performed with a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of the 121 NHS trusts and health boards that use the IMG. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the risk of a medication error and other sources of uncertainty. RESULTS: The net monetary benefit at £20,000/quality-adjusted life year was £3,190,064 (95% credible interval (CrI): -346,709 to 8,480,665), favouring user-testing with a 96% chance of cost-effectiveness. Incremental cost-savings were £240,943 (95% CrI 43,527-491,576), also favouring user-tested guidelines with a 99% chance of cost-saving. The total user testing cost was £6317 (95% CrI 6012-6627). These findings were robust to assumptions about a range of input parameters, but greater uncertainty was seen with a lower medication error risk. CONCLUSIONS: User-testing of injectable medicines guidelines is a low-cost intervention that is highly likely to be cost-effective, especially for high-risk medicines.