-
Human Resources For Health Jun 2020Workforce studies often identify burnout as a nursing 'outcome'. Yet, burnout itself-what constitutes it, what factors contribute to its development, and what the wider...
BACKGROUND
Workforce studies often identify burnout as a nursing 'outcome'. Yet, burnout itself-what constitutes it, what factors contribute to its development, and what the wider consequences are for individuals, organisations, or their patients-is rarely made explicit. We aimed to provide a comprehensive summary of research that examines theorised relationships between burnout and other variables, in order to determine what is known (and not known) about the causes and consequences of burnout in nursing, and how this relates to theories of burnout.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO. We included quantitative primary empirical studies (published in English) which examined associations between burnout and work-related factors in the nursing workforce.
RESULTS
Ninety-one papers were identified. The majority (n = 87) were cross-sectional studies; 39 studies used all three subscales of the Maslach Burnout Inventory (MBI) Scale to measure burnout. As hypothesised by Maslach, we identified high workload, value incongruence, low control over the job, low decision latitude, poor social climate/social support, and low rewards as predictors of burnout. Maslach suggested that turnover, sickness absence, and general health were effects of burnout; however, we identified relationships only with general health and sickness absence. Other factors that were classified as predictors of burnout in the nursing literature were low/inadequate nurse staffing levels, ≥ 12-h shifts, low schedule flexibility, time pressure, high job and psychological demands, low task variety, role conflict, low autonomy, negative nurse-physician relationship, poor supervisor/leader support, poor leadership, negative team relationship, and job insecurity. Among the outcomes of burnout, we found reduced job performance, poor quality of care, poor patient safety, adverse events, patient negative experience, medication errors, infections, patient falls, and intention to leave.
CONCLUSIONS
The patterns identified by these studies consistently show that adverse job characteristics-high workload, low staffing levels, long shifts, and low control-are associated with burnout in nursing. The potential consequences for staff and patients are severe. The literature on burnout in nursing partly supports Maslach's theory, but some areas are insufficiently tested, in particular, the association between burnout and turnover, and relationships were found for some MBI dimensions only.
Topics: Burnout, Professional; Health Status; Humans; Internal-External Control; Job Satisfaction; Leadership; Nurse's Role; Nurses; Patient Safety; Personnel Turnover; Quality of Health Care; Sick Leave; Time Factors; Workload; Workplace
PubMed: 32503559
DOI: 10.1186/s12960-020-00469-9 -
Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety 2020Medication errors occur at any point of the medication management process, and are a major cause of death and harm globally. The objective of this review was to compare... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND AND AIMS
Medication errors occur at any point of the medication management process, and are a major cause of death and harm globally. The objective of this review was to compare the effectiveness of different interventions in reducing prescribing, dispensing and administration medication errors in acute medical and surgical settings.
METHODS
The protocol for this systematic review was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019124587). The library databases, MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched from inception to February 2019. Studies were included if they involved testing of an intervention aimed at reducing medication errors in adult, acute medical or surgical settings. Meta-analyses were performed to examine the effectiveness of intervention types.
RESULTS
A total of 34 articles were included with 12 intervention types identified. Meta-analysis showed that prescribing errors were reduced by pharmacist-led medication reconciliation, computerised medication reconciliation, pharmacist partnership, prescriber education, medication reconciliation by trained mentors and computerised physician order entry (CPOE) as single interventions. Medication administration errors were reduced by CPOE and the use of an automated drug distribution system as single interventions. Combined interventions were also found to be effective in reducing prescribing or administration medication errors. No interventions were found to reduce dispensing error rates. Most studies were conducted at single-site hospitals, with chart review being the most common method for collecting medication error data. Clinical significance of interventions was examined in 21 studies. Since many studies were conducted in a pre-post format, future studies should include a concurrent control group.
CONCLUSION
The systematic review identified a number of single and combined intervention types that were effective in reducing medication errors, which clinicians and policymakers could consider for implementation in medical and surgical settings. New directions for future research should examine interdisciplinary collaborative approaches comprising physicians, pharmacists and nurses.
LAY SUMMARY
.
INTRODUCTION
Medication errors or mistakes may happen at any time in hospital, and they are a major reason for death and harm around the world.
OBJECTIVE
To compare the effectiveness of different activities in reducing medication errors occurring with prescribing, giving and supplying medications in adult medical and surgical settings in hospital.
METHODS
Six library databases were examined from the time they were developed to February 2019. Studies were included if they involved testing of an activity aimed at reducing medication errors in adult medical and surgical settings in hospital. Statistical analysis was used to look at the success of different types of activities.
RESULTS
A total of 34 studies were included with 12 activity types identified. Statistical analysis showed that prescribing errors were reduced by pharmacists matching medications, computers matching medications, partnerships with pharmacists, prescriber education, medication matching by trained physicians, and computerised physician order entry (CPOE). Medication-giving errors were reduced by the use of CPOE and an automated medication distribution system. The combination of different activity types were also shown to be successful in reducing prescribing or medication-giving errors. No activities were found to be successful in reducing errors relating to supplying medications. Most studies were conducted at one hospital with reviewing patient charts being the most common way for collecting information about medication errors. In 21 out of 34 articles, researchers examined the effect of activity types on patient harm caused by medication errors. Many studies did not involve the use of a control group that does not receive the activity.
CONCLUSION
A number of activity types were shown to be successful in reducing prescribing and medication-giving errors. New directions for future research should examine activities comprising health professionals working together.
PubMed: 33240478
DOI: 10.1177/2042098620968309 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare professional or patient. Medication errors in hospitalised adults may cause harm, additional costs, and even death.
OBJECTIVES
To determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce medication errors in adults in hospital settings.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers on 16 January 2020. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies investigating interventions aimed at reducing medication errors in hospitalised adults, compared with usual care or other interventions. Outcome measures included adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs, preventable ADEs, medication errors, mortality, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life and identified/solved discrepancies. We included any hospital setting, such as inpatient care units, outpatient care settings, and accident and emergency departments.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Where necessary, we extracted and reanalysed ITS study data using piecewise linear regression, corrected for autocorrelation and seasonality, where possible. MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 studies: 51 RCTs and 14 ITS studies, involving 110,875 participants. About half of trials gave rise to 'some concerns' for risk of bias during the randomisation process and one-third lacked blinding of outcome assessment. Most ITS studies presented low risk of bias. Most studies came from high-income countries or high-resource settings. Medication reconciliation -the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to the medications that the patient has been taking- was the most common type of intervention studied. Electronic prescribing systems, barcoding for correct administering of medications, organisational changes, feedback on medication errors, education of professionals and improved medication dispensing systems were other interventions studied. Medication reconciliation Low-certainty evidence suggests that medication reconciliation (MR) versus no-MR may reduce medication errors (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.74; 3 studies; n=379). Compared to no-MR, MR probably reduces ADEs (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.80; 3 studies, n=1336 ; moderate-certainty evidence), but has little to no effect on length of stay (mean difference (MD) -0.30 days, 95%CI -1.93 to 1.33 days; 3 studies, n=527) and quality of life (MD -1.51, 95%CI -10.04 to 7.02; 1 study, n=131). Low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may reduce medication errors (OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.48; 8 studies, n=2648) and may increase ADEs (OR 1.34, 95%CI 0.73 to 2.44; 3 studies, n=2873). Compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may have little to no effect on length of stay (MD -0.25, 95%CI -1.05 to 0.56; 6 studies, 3983). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that this intervention probably has little to no effect on mortality during hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.7; 2 studies, n=1000), and on readmissions at one month (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.14; 2 studies, n=997); and low-certainty evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on quality of life (MD 0.00, 95%CI -14.09 to 14.09; 1 study, n=724). Low-certainty evidence suggests that database-assisted MR conducted by pharmacists, versus unassisted MR conducted by pharmacists, may reduce potential ADEs (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.64; 2 studies, n=3326), and may have no effect on length of stay (MD 1.00, 95%CI -0.17 to 2.17; 1 study, n=311). Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR performed by trained pharmacist technicians, versus pharmacists, may have little to no difference on length of stay (MD -0.30, 95%CI -2.12 to 1.52; 1 study, n=183). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR before admission may increase the identification of discrepancies compared with MR after admission (MD 1.27, 95%CI 0.46 to 2.08; 1 study, n=307). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that multimodal interventions probably increase discrepancy resolutions compared to usual care (RR 2.14, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.53; 1 study, n=487). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE)/clinical decision support systems (CDSS) Moderate-certainty evidence shows that CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors compared to paper-based systems (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.31 to 1.79; 2 studies, n=88). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that, compared with standard CPOE/CDSS, improved CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.97; 2 studies, n=630). Low-certainty evidence suggests that prioritised alerts provided by CPOE/CDSS may prevent ADEs compared to non-prioritised (inconsequential) alerts (MD 1.98, 95%CI 1.65 to 2.31; 1 study; participant numbers unavailable). Barcode identification of participants/medications Low-certainty evidence suggests that barcoding may reduce medication errors (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=50,545). Reduced working hours Low-certainty evidence suggests that reduced working hours may reduce serious medication errors (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63 to 1.09; 1 study, n=634). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Feedback on prescribing errors Low-certainty evidence suggests that feedback on prescribing errors may reduce medication errors (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, n=384). Dispensing system Low-certainty evidence suggests that dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=1775).
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual care, medication reconciliation, CPOE/CDSS, barcoding, feedback and dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors and ADEs. However, the results are imprecise for some outcomes related to medication reconciliation and CPOE/CDSS. The evidence for other interventions is very uncertain. Powered and methodologically sound studies are needed to address the identified evidence gaps. Innovative, synergistic strategies -including those that involve patients- should also be evaluated.
Topics: Adult; Hospitalization; Hospitals; Humans; Medication Errors; Medication Reconciliation; Pharmacists
PubMed: 34822165
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD009985.pub2 -
Journal of Pediatric Nursing 2022Medication errors are a great concern to health care organisations as they are costly and pose a significant risk to patients. Children are three times more likely to be... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Medication errors are a great concern to health care organisations as they are costly and pose a significant risk to patients. Children are three times more likely to be affected by medication errors than adults with medication administration error rates reported to be over 70%.
OBJECTIVE
To identify nursing interventions to reduce medication administration errors and perform a meta-analysis.
METHODS
Online databases; British Nursing Index (BNI), Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), EMBASE and MEDLINE were searched for relevant studies published between January 2000 to 2020. Studies with clear primary or secondary aims focusing on interventions to reduce medication administration errors in paediatrics, children and or neonates were included in the review.
RESULTS
442 studies were screened and18 studies met the inclusion criteria. Seven interventions were identified from included studies; education programmes, medication information services, clinical pharmacist involvement, double checking, barriers to reduce interruptions during drug calculation and preparation, implementation of smart pumps and improvement strategies. Educational interventional aspects were the most common identified in 13 out of 18 included studies. Meta-analysis demonstrated an associated 64% reduction in medicine administration errors post intervention (pooled OR 0.36 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.21-0.63) P = 0.0003).
CONCLUSION
Medication safety education is an important element of interventions to reduce administration errors. Medication errors are multifaceted that require a bundle interventional approach to address the complexities and dynamics relevant to the local context. It is imperative that causes of errors need to be identified prior to implementation of appropriate interventions.
Topics: Adult; Child; Drug Dosage Calculations; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Medication Errors; Pediatrics; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Pharmacists
PubMed: 34507851
DOI: 10.1016/j.pedn.2021.08.024 -
BMJ Quality & Safety Jul 2020Double checking medication administration in hospitals is often standard practice, particularly for high-risk drugs, yet its effectiveness in reducing medication... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Double checking medication administration in hospitals is often standard practice, particularly for high-risk drugs, yet its effectiveness in reducing medication administration errors (MAEs) and improving patient outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating evidence of the effectiveness of double checking to reduce MAEs.
METHODS
Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid@Journals, OpenGrey) were searched for studies evaluating the use and effectiveness of double checking on reducing medication administration errors in a hospital setting. Included studies were required to report any of three outcome measures: an effect estimate such as a risk ratio or risk difference representing the association between double checking and MAEs, or between double checking and patient harm; or a rate representing adherence to the hospital's double checking policy.
RESULTS
Thirteen studies were identified, including 10 studies using an observational study design, two randomised controlled trials and one randomised trial in a simulated setting. Studies included both paediatric and adult inpatient populations and varied considerably in quality. Among three good quality studies, only one showed a significant association between double checking and a reduction in MAEs, another showed no association, and the third study reported only adherence rates. No studies investigated changes in medication-related harm associated with double checking. Reported double checking adherence rates ranged from 52% to 97% of administrations. Only three studies reported if and how independent and primed double checking were differentiated.
CONCLUSION
There is insufficient evidence that double versus single checking of medication administration is associated with lower rates of MAEs or reduced harm. Most comparative studies fail to define or investigate the level of adherence to independent double checking, further limiting conclusions regarding effectiveness in error prevention. Higher-quality studies are needed to determine if, and in what context (eg, drug type, setting), double checking produces sufficient benefits in patient safety to warrant the considerable resources required. CRD42018103436.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Humans; Medication Errors; Observational Studies as Topic; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 31391315
DOI: 10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009552 -
PloS One 2015One-third of all medication errors causing harm to hospitalized patients occur in the medication preparation and administration phase, which is predominantly a nursing... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
One-third of all medication errors causing harm to hospitalized patients occur in the medication preparation and administration phase, which is predominantly a nursing activity. To monitor, evaluate and improve the quality and safety of this process, evidence-based quality indicators can be used.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of study was to identify evidence-based quality indicators (structure, process and outcome) for safe in-hospital medication preparation and administration.
METHODS
MEDLINE, EMBASE and CINAHL were searched for relevant studies published up to January 2015. Additionally, nine databases were searched to identify relevant grey literature. Two reviewers independently selected studies if (1) the method for quality indicator development combined a literature search with expert panel opinion, (2) the study contained quality indicators on medication safety, and (3) any of the quality indicators were applicable to hospital medication preparation and administration. A multidisciplinary team appraised the studies independently using the AIRE instrument, which contains four domains and 20 items. Quality indicators applicable to in-hospital medication preparation and administration were extracted using a structured form.
RESULTS
The search identified 1683 studies, of which 64 were reviewed in detail and five met the inclusion criteria. Overall, according to the AIRE domains, all studies were clear on purpose; most of them applied stakeholder involvement and used evidence reasonably; usage of the indicator in practice was scarcely described. A total of 21 quality indicators were identified: 5 structure indicators (e.g. safety management and high alert medication), 11 process indicators (e.g. verification and protocols) and 5 outcome indicators (e.g. harm and death). These quality indicators partially cover the 7 rights.
CONCLUSION
Despite the relatively small number of included studies, the identified quality indicators can serve as an excellent starting point for further development of nursing specific quality indicators for medication safety. Especially on the right patient, right route, right time and right documentation there is room future development of quality indicators.
Topics: Databases, Factual; Drug Prescriptions; Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Medication Errors; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Quality Indicators, Health Care
PubMed: 25884623
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122695 -
BMJ Open Feb 2016Pharmacists play a role in providing medication reconciliation. However, data on effectiveness on patients' clinical outcomes appear inconclusive. Thus, the aim of this... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVES
Pharmacists play a role in providing medication reconciliation. However, data on effectiveness on patients' clinical outcomes appear inconclusive. Thus, the aim of this study was to systematically investigate the effect of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes on clinical outcomes at hospital transitions.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, IPA, CINHAL and PsycINFO from inception to December 2014. Included studies were all published studies in English that compared the effectiveness of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation interventions to usual care, aimed at improving medication reconciliation programmes. Meta-analysis was carried out using a random effects model, and subgroup analysis was conducted to determine the sources of heterogeneity.
RESULTS
17 studies involving 21,342 adult patients were included. Eight studies were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). Most studies targeted multiple transitions and compared comprehensive medication reconciliation programmes including telephone follow-up/home visit, patient counselling or both, during the first 30 days of follow-up. The pooled relative risks showed a more substantial reduction of 67%, 28% and 19% in adverse drug event-related hospital revisits (RR 0.33; 95% CI 0.20 to 0.53), emergency department (ED) visits (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.57 to 0.92) and hospital readmissions (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.70 to 0.95) in the intervention group than in the usual care group, respectively. The pooled data on mortality (RR 1.05; 95% CI 0.95 to 1.16) and composite readmission and/or ED visit (RR 0.95; 95% CI 0.90 to 1.00) did not differ among the groups. There was significant heterogeneity in the results related to readmissions and ED visits, however. Subgroup analyses based on study design and outcome timing did not show statistically significant results.
CONCLUSION
Pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes are effective at improving post-hospital healthcare utilisation. This review supports the implementation of pharmacist-led medication reconciliation programmes that include some component aimed at improving medication safety.
Topics: Drug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactions; Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Medication Reconciliation; Patient Admission; Patient Discharge; Patient Readmission; Pharmacists; Pharmacy Service, Hospital
PubMed: 26908524
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-010003 -
European Review For Medical and... May 2019Medication administration accounts for 40% of the nursing clinical activity in hospitals and nurses play a central role in granting the patient safety, as they are... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Medication administration accounts for 40% of the nursing clinical activity in hospitals and nurses play a central role in granting the patient safety, as they are directly responsible for the patient care. This review aims at analyzing the correlation between the clinical risk management and the occurrence of medication errors and the effects of the shift work (such as excessive fatigue and sleep deprivation after a shift in hospital) on inpatient nurses.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
This paper adheres to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines. A systematic review was conducted according to the PRISMA statement and pertinent articles were selected based on inclusion criteria and quality assessment factors. Two reviewers searched the bibliographic databases PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, CINAHL to collect all the available articles in English and Italian issued between 1992 and August 2017.
RESULTS
The reviewers analyzed 19 of the 723 initially extracted references, as they focused on the impact of workload, shifts and sleep deprivation on the probability of making medication errors.
CONCLUSIONS
The main reasons behind medication errors are stress, fatigue, increased workload, night shifts, nurse staffing ratio and workflow interruptions. These factors can have a significant negative impact on the health and the performance of the employees. It is desirable to extend and deepen the research to identify appropriate measures to minimize medication errors.
Topics: Humans; Medication Errors; Nurses; Patient Safety; Shift Work Schedule; Work Schedule Tolerance; Workload
PubMed: 31173328
DOI: 10.26355/eurrev_201905_17963 -
Nurse Educator 2018The purpose of this study was to synthesize the available empirical evidence on prelicensure nursing students' medication errors. A systematic literature review of... (Review)
Review
The purpose of this study was to synthesize the available empirical evidence on prelicensure nursing students' medication errors. A systematic literature review of original research publications was carried out. After the selection process, only 19 articles complied with all the requirements for inclusion in this review. The findings showed that few studies to date have analyzed errors and near misses involving nursing students, and the current evidence suggests that the incidence of them is high.
Topics: Humans; Medication Errors; Nursing Education Research; Risk Management; Students, Nursing
PubMed: 29210898
DOI: 10.1097/NNE.0000000000000481 -
Diseases of the Colon and Rectum Jun 2017Physician burnout in the United States has reached epidemic proportions and is rising rapidly, although burnout in other occupations is stable. Its negative impact is... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Physician burnout in the United States has reached epidemic proportions and is rising rapidly, although burnout in other occupations is stable. Its negative impact is far reaching and includes harm to the burned-out physician, as well as patients, coworkers, family members, close friends, and healthcare organizations.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this review is to provide an accurate, current summary of what is known about physician burnout and to develop a framework to reverse its current negative impact, decrease its prevalence, and implement effective organizational and personal interventions.
DATA SOURCES
I completed a comprehensive MEDLINE search of the medical literature from January 1, 2000, through December 28, 2016, related to medical student and physician burnout, stress, depression, suicide ideation, suicide, resiliency, wellness, and well-being. In addition, I selectively reviewed secondary articles, books addressing the relevant issues, and oral presentations at national professional meetings since 2013.
STUDY SELECTION
Healthcare organizations within the United States were studied.
RESULTS
The literature review is presented in 5 sections covering the basics of defining and measuring burnout; its impact, incidence, and causes; and interventions and remediation strategies.
CONCLUSIONS
All US medical students, physicians in training, and practicing physicians are at significant risk of burnout. Its prevalence now exceeds 50%. Burnout is the unintended net result of multiple, highly disruptive changes in society at large, the medical profession, and the healthcare system. Both individual and organizational strategies have been only partially successful in mitigating burnout and in developing resiliency and well-being among physicians. Two highly effective strategies are aligning personal and organizational values and enabling physicians to devote 20% of their work activities to the part of their medical practice that is especially meaningful to them. More research is needed.
Topics: Burnout, Professional; Delivery of Health Care; Humans; Incidence; Medical Errors; Near Miss, Healthcare; Personnel Turnover; Physicians; Professional Autonomy; Stress, Psychological; Suicide; United States; Workload; Workplace
PubMed: 28481850
DOI: 10.1097/DCR.0000000000000844