Development of a standardized, citywide process for managing smart-pump drug libraries.

PURPOSE: Development and implementation of an interprofessional consensus-driven process for review and optimization of smart-pump drug libraries and dosing limits are described. SUMMARY: The Indianapolis Coalition for Patient Safety (ICPS), which represents 6 Indianapolis-area health systems, identified an opportunity to reduce clinically insignificant alerts that smart infusion pumps present to end users. Through a consensus-driven process, ICPS aimed to identify best practices to implement at individual hospitals in order to establish specific action items for smart-pump drug library optimization. A work group of pharmacists, nurses, and industrial engineers met to evaluate variability within and lack of scrutiny of smart-pump drug libraries. The work group used Lean Six Sigma methodologies to generate a list of key needs and barriers to be addressed in process standardization. The group reviewed targets for smart-pump drug library optimization, including dosing limits, types of alerts reviewed, policies, and safety best practices. The work group also analyzed existing processes at each site to develop a final consensus statement outlining a model process for reviewing alerts and managing smart-pump data. Analysis of the total number of alerts per device across ICPS-affiliated health systems over a 4-year period indicated a 50% decrease (from 7.2 to 3.6 alerts per device per month) after implementation of the model by ICPS member organizations. CONCLUSION: Through implementation of a standardized, consensus-driven process for smart-pump drug library optimization, ICPS member health systems reduced clinically insignificant smart-pump alerts.

Maximizing Savings and Efficiencies While Managing an Inpatient Drug Formulary and Inventory.

Continual price increases of pharmaceutical products have taken a great toll on pharmacy expenditures. Cost of prescription drugs for the health-care system increased by an average of 11.7% in 2015. In today's market with ever-increasing drug costs, it is important to focus on using medications in a manner that optimizes patient care, as well as being fiscally responsible for the health-care system. There are many reports, services, and analytics available that help identify areas for improvement and optimization. However, it is important for pharmacists to be creative and find novel ways to decrease the inventory cost and increase efficiencies. Doing this will improve the bottom line for the organization and allow for a decrease in health-care spending.

Standardizing concentrations of adult drug infusions in Indiana.

PURPOSE: A multidisciplinary, consensus-driven initiative to promote the use of standardized medication concentrations for adult drug infusions across the state of Indiana is described. METHODS: To accomplish development of the Indiana Standard Concentrations of Adult Drug Infusions List ("the Indiana List"), several available lists of i.v. concentrations were compiled, consolidated, and compared. Lists of adult standardized i.v. concentrations were primarily drawn from Indiana regional patient safety coalitions, published literature, and publicly available lists of recommended i.v. concentrations. The standardization project, which expanded initial work completed by the Indianapolis Coalition for Patient Safety, was conducted in conjunction with Purdue University's Center for Medication Safety Advancement, the Indiana Hospital Association, and the 11 regional patient safety coalitions across the state. RESULTS: After a review of 9 existing lists of standard i.v. concentrations, an initial list of 69 concentrations representing a total of 37 medications was derived; 34 of those concentrations were represented on at least 1 of the 3 evaluated Indiana regional patient safety coalition lists. A statewide interdisciplinary work group of representatives of regional patient safety coalitions and 9 health systems representing a total of 81 hospitals ranging from academic medical centers to critical access hospitals assembled to develop consensus on a final list of standard medication concentrations for adult i.v. infusions. CONCLUSION: A final list of 28 concentrations of 26 medications was identified for the recommended Indiana List by an interdisciplinary work group. A checklist of considerations for implementation was also developed.

Factors associated with reported preventable adverse drug events: a retrospective, case-control study.

BACKGROUND: It has been reported that error occurs at some point during the medication use process in approximately 6% of medication doses administered in the inpatient setting. An estimated 1-10% of medication errors lead to patient harm; however, factors affecting the risk of harm from a medication error are undefined in the literature. OBJECTIVE: To identify independent factors affecting the risk of reported preventable adverse drug events (ADEs) (ie, medication errors contributing to patient harm) compared to medication errors that did not contribute to patient harm in a diverse patient population. METHODS: This was a retrospective, case-control study conducted at 3 hospitals within a large health system. Medication error reports from July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2010, were assessed. All reported medication errors determined to have contributed to patient harm were matched 1:1 with a medication error that did not contribute to harm. Data collected through review of the incident report and medical record included patient, provider, medication, and other related factors. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine the relationship of potential factors to patient harm. RESULTS: Of 4321 medication errors reported at study sites, 182 (4%) contributed to patient harm. Factors associated with increased independent risk of harm were 30-day readmission, time of day 0300-0659, and Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) high-alert medications. Factors associated with decreased independent risk of harm were multiple medication errors, occurrence during February or April, dispensing errors, and pharmacist review of medication order. CONCLUSIONS: Health systems should develop programs to promote safe, conscientious use of ISMP high-alert medications, promote pharmacist review, control the use of cabinet overrides, and direct provider attention toward recently admitted patients. Efforts should be made to determine factors associated with risk of harm at local levels.

Evidence-based review of the black-box warning for droperidol.

PURPOSE: Data collected from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) under the Freedom of Information Act are presented to help clinicians understand the data prompting the black-box warning for droperidol and to make educated decisions regarding the use of droperidol and alternative agents. SUMMARY: A written request was submitted to FDA to provide a report of any and all reports of cardiovascular adverse events related to droperidol that were part of the decision to add a black-box warning to the label of droperidol. The report listed 277 cases of adverse effects associated with droperidol since its introduction to the market in 1970. Many of the reports were duplicates, leaving a total of 65 individual cases. Of these cases, only 2 described adverse effects possibly caused by droperidol in dosages commonly used in the United States. In addition to these reports, the results of two European studies prompted FDA to make the decision for the black-box warning. Both studies used droperidol doses 50-100 times higher than those used in the United States. CONCLUSION: Studies show that there is a dose-dependent increase in the rate of adverse cardiovascular events when droperidol is used either alone or in combination with other medications that cause Q-T interval prolongation. At this time, there does not appear to be significant evidence to suggest that serotonin type 3-receptor (5-HT(3)) antagonists are safer than droperidol with regard to Q-T interval prolongation. More studies are needed to determine the safety and efficacy of droperidol when used in doses of 0.625-1.25 mg compared with the 5-HT(3) antagonists.