Medication safety strategies in European adult, paediatric, and neonatal intensive care units: a cross-sectional survey.

OBJECTIVES: Patients in intensive care units (ICUs) are potentially more vulnerable to medication errors than patients admitted to general wards. However, little is known about medication safety strategies used in European ICUs. Our objectives were to explore the strategies being used and being planned within European ICUs, to identify areas of variation, and to inform recommendations to improve medication safety in this patient group. METHODS: We distributed an online survey, in seven European languages, via professional networks and social media. The survey explored a range of medication safety strategies and whether they were in use (and if so, whether fully or partially implemented) or being planned. Demographic information about respondents and their ICUs was also captured. A descriptive analysis was conducted, which included exploring geographical variation. RESULTS: We obtained 587 valid responses from 32 different countries, with 317 (54%) completed by pharmacy staff. Medication safety practices most commonly implemented were patients' allergies being visible for all staff involved in their care (fully implemented in 382 (65%) of respondents' ICUs), standardised emergency medication stored in a fixed place (337, 57%), and use of standardised medication concentrations for commonly used intravenous infusions (330, 56%). Electronic prescribing systems were fully implemented in 310 (53%). A pharmacist was reported to be fully implemented in 181 (31%) of ICUs, of which there was 126 (70%) where there was a pharmacist review of all ordered medication five days per week. Critical care pharmacists were most common in Northern European ICUs (fully implemented to ICUs in 102, 50%) and electronic prescribing in Western Europe (108, 65%). CONCLUSIONS: There is considerable variation in medication safety strategies used within European ICUs, both between and within geographical areas. Our findings may be helpful to ICU staff in identifying strategies that should be considered for implementation.

Reminding staff of diligence during the medication process is not enough to ensure safety: Learning from wrong fluid product selection incidents in the care of critically ill patients.

Background and objectives: Wrong fluid product selection may cause harm to patients. This study aimed to describe voluntarily reported wrong fluid product selection incidents, including their consequences, the reported latent conditions and active failures leading to these and the suggested safeguards to prevent their occurrence, and to compare the suggested and literature-based safeguards to improve the fluid therapy safety within the intensive care (ICU) environment. Methods: All voluntarily and anonymously reported wrong fluid product selection incidents in all Finnish ICUs during 2007-2017 were reviewed. The incident reports included categorized data that were analyzed quantitatively, and narratives that were analyzed qualitatively, using content analysis. The results were reported as frequencies and percentages and described by using Reason's model of human error. Results: Over the eleven years, one wrong fluid product selection incident was reported every six days (n = 663; 584 errors, 79 near misses); most were reported to have occurred during the dispensing/preparing phase (92%). Of the 584 reported selection errors, a quarter (26%) was reported to have caused consequences to patients, and one third (35%) to have required corrective or monitoring actions. The main reported latent conditions to the incidents were Working environment and resources (e.g. workload and time pressure) (29%), Similar-looking and -sounding names or shared features of the product containers (i.e. the LASA phenomenon) (28%) and Working methods (22%); and the main reported active failures were a lack of concentration, or forgetfulness (26%). Some usable suggestions of safeguards were made, e.g. optimizing fluid storage (15%) or utilizing checking practices (21%). While requiring accuracy, i.e. reminding staff of diligence and to be more attentive to detail during the whole medication process, was emphasized in most reports (71%), involving manufacturers in redesigning labels of fluid products, utilizing technology and strengthening pharmacy services are advocated existing literature. Conclusions: Wrong fluid product selection incidents with various latent conditions and active failures were reported more than once a week. To minimize the serious LASA phenomenon, multi-professional collaboration, coordinated international discussion and agreements of solutions with manufacturers, regulators and end-users, are needed. However, work is also needed to reduce the other latent factors, such as Working environment and resources as well as cognitive biases in daily work that may contribute to the occurrence of LASA related errors.

Describing voluntarily reported fluid therapy incidents in the care of critically ill patients: Identifying, and learning from, points of risk at the national level.

Background: Fluid therapy is a common intervention in critically ill patients. Fluid therapy errors may cause harm to patients. Thus, understanding of reported fluid therapy incidents is required in order to learn from them and develop protective measures, including utilizing expertise of pharmacists and technology to improve patient safety at the national level. Objectives: To describe fluid therapy incidents voluntarily reported in intensive care and high dependency units (ICUs) to a national incident reporting system, by investigating the error types, fluid products, consequences to patients and actions taken to alleviate them, and to identify at which phase of the medication process the incidents had occurred and had been detected. Methods: Medication related voluntarily reported incident (n = 7623) reports were obtained from all ICUs in 2007-2017. Incidents concerning fluid therapy (n = 2201) were selected. The retrospective analysis utilized categorized data and narrative descriptions of the incidents. The results were expressed as frequencies and percentages. Results: Most voluntarily reported incidents had occurred during the dispensing/preparing phase (n = 1306, 59%) of the medication process: a point of risk. Most incidents (n = 1975, 90%) had reached the patient and passed through many phases in the medication process and nursing shift change checks before detection. One third of the errors (n = 596, 30%) were reported to have caused consequences to patients. One quarter (n = 492, 25%) of the errors were reported to have required an additional procedure to alleviate or monitor the consequences. Conclusions: Utilizing national incident report data enabled identifying systemic points of risk in the medication process and learning to improve patient safety. To prevent similar incidents, initial interventions should focus on the dispensing/preparing phase before implementing active medication identification procedures at each phase of the medication process and nursing shift changes. Strengthening clinical pharmacy services, utilizing technology, coordinated by IV Fluid Coordinators and Medication Safety Officers, could improve patient safety in the ICUs.

Nurses´ perceptions of automated dispensing cabinets - an observational study and an online survey.

BACKGROUND: Thirty-two automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) were introduced in May 2015 in Kuopio University Hospital, Finland. These medication distribution systems represent relatively new technology in Europe and are aimed at rationalising the medication process and improving patient safety. Nurses are the end-users of ADCs, and it is therefore important to survey their perceptions of ADCs. Our aim was to investigate nurses' perceptions of ADCs and the impacts of ADCs on nurses' work. METHODS: The study was conducted in the Anaesthesia and Surgical Unit (OR) and Intensive Care Unit (ICU), of a tertiary care hospital, in Finland. We used two different research methods: observation and a survey. The observational study consisted of two 5-day observation periods in both units, one before (2014) and the other after (2016) the introduction of ADCs. An online questionnaire was distributed to 346 nurses in April 2017. The data were analysed using descriptive statistics including frequencies and percentages and the Chi-Square test. RESULTS: The majority (n = 68) of the 81 respondents were satisfied with ADCs. Attitudes to ADCs were more positive in the ICU than in the OR. Nearly 80% of the nurses in the ICU and 42% in the OR found that ADCs make their work easier. The observational study revealed that in the OR, time spent on dispensing and preparing medications decreased on average by 32 min per 8-h shift and more time was spent on direct patient care activities. The need to collect medicines from outside the operating theatre during an operation was less after the introduction of ADCs than before that. Some resistance to change was observed in the OR in the form of non-compliance with some instructions; nurses took medicines from ADCs when someone else was logged in and the barcode was not always used. The results of the survey support these findings. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, nurses were satisfied with ADCs and stated that they make their work easier. In the ICU, nurses were more satisfied with ADCs and complied with the instructions better than the nurses in the OR. One reason for that can be the more extensive pilot period in the ICU.

Intermittent levosimendan treatment in patients with severe congestive heart failure.

OBJECTIVE: Levosimendan (LS) is a novel inodilator for the treatment of severe congestive heart failure (CHF). In this study, we investigated the potential long-term effects of intermittent LS treatment on the pathophysiology of heart failure. METHODS: Thirteen patients with modest to severe CHF received three 24-h intravenous infusions of LS at 3-week intervals. Exercise capacity was determined by bicycle ergospirometry, well-being assessed by Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ) and laboratory parameters of interest measured before and after each treatment. RESULTS: One patient experienced non-sustained periods of ventricular tachycardia (VT) during the first infusion and had to discontinue the study. Otherwise the LS infusions were well tolerated. Exercise capacity (VO2max) did not improve significantly during the study although symptoms decreased (P < 0.0001). Levels of plasma NT-proANP, NT-proBNP and NT-proXNP decreased 30-50% during each infusion (P < 0.001 for all), but the changes disappeared within 3 weeks. Although norepinephrine (NE) appeared to increase during the first treatment (P = 0.019), no long-term changes were observed. CONCLUSION: Intermittent LS treatments decreased effectively and repetitively plasma vasoactive peptide levels, but no carryover effects were observed. Patients' symptoms decreased for the whole study period although there was no objective improvement of their exercise capacity. The prognostic significance of these effects needs to be further studied.