-
Journal of Clinical Nursing Sep 2023Medication administration errors (MAEs) cause preventable patient harm and cost billions of dollars from already-strained healthcare budgets. An emerging factor... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Medication administration errors (MAEs) cause preventable patient harm and cost billions of dollars from already-strained healthcare budgets. An emerging factor contributing to these errors is nurse fatigue. Given medication administration is the most frequent clinical task nurses undertake; it is vital to understand how fatigue impacts MAEs.
OBJECTIVE
Examine the evidence on the effect of fatigue on MAEs and near misses by registered nurses working in hospital settings.
METHOD
Arksey and O'Malley's scoping review framework was used to guide this review and PAGER framework for data extraction and analysis. The PRISMA checklist was completed. Four electronic databases were searched: CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus and PsycINFO. Eligibility criteria included primary peer review papers published in English Language with no date/time limiters applied. The search was completed in August 2021 and focussed on articles that included: (a) registered nurses in hospital settings, (b) MAEs, (c) measures of sleep, hours of work, or fatigue.
RESULTS
Thirty-eight studies were included in the review. 82% of the studies identified fatigue to be a contributing factor in MAEs and near misses (NMs). Fatigue is associated with reduced cognitive performance and lack of attention and vigilance. It is associated with poor nursing performance and decreased patient safety. Components of shift work, such as disruption to the circadian rhythm and overtime work, were identified as contributing factors. However, there was marked heterogeneity in strategies for measuring fatigue within the included studies.
RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE
Fatigue is a multidimensional concept that has the capacity to impact nurses' performance when engaged in medication administration. Nurses are susceptible to fatigue due to work characteristics such as nightwork, overtime and the requirement to perform cognitively demanding tasks. The mixed results found within this review indicate that larger scale studies are needed with particular emphasis on the impact of overtime work. Policy around safe working hours need to be re-evaluated and fatigue management systems put in place to ensure delivery of safe and quality patient care.
Topics: Humans; Pharmaceutical Preparations; Patient Safety; Hospitals; Fatigue; Menthol; Nurses
PubMed: 36707921
DOI: 10.1111/jocn.16620 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Mar 2013Medication reconciliation identifies and resolves unintentional discrepancies between patients' medication lists across transitions in care. The purpose of this review... (Review)
Review
Medication reconciliation identifies and resolves unintentional discrepancies between patients' medication lists across transitions in care. The purpose of this review is to summarize evidence about the effectiveness of hospital-based medication reconciliation interventions. Searches encompassed MEDLINE through November 2012 and EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials through July 2012. Eligible studies evaluated the effects of hospital-based medication reconciliation on unintentional discrepancies with nontrivial risks for harm to patients or 30-day postdischarge emergency department visits and readmission. Two reviewers evaluated study eligibility, abstracted data, and assessed study quality. Eighteen studies evaluating 20 interventions met the selection criteria. Pharmacists performed medication reconciliation in 17 of the 20 interventions. Most unintentional discrepancies identified had no clinical significance. Medication reconciliation alone probably does not reduce postdischarge hospital utilization but may do so when bundled with interventions aimed at improving care transitions.
Topics: Emergency Service, Hospital; Humans; Medical History Taking; Medication Reconciliation; Patient Discharge; Patient Readmission; Patient Safety; Pharmacists; Professional Role; Risk Assessment
PubMed: 23460096
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303051-00006 -
Annals of Internal Medicine Mar 2013Falls are common among inpatients. Several reviews, including 4 meta-analyses involving 19 studies, show that multicomponent programs to prevent falls among inpatients... (Review)
Review
Falls are common among inpatients. Several reviews, including 4 meta-analyses involving 19 studies, show that multicomponent programs to prevent falls among inpatients reduce relative risk for falls by as much as 30%. The purpose of this updated review is to reassess the benefits and harms of fall prevention programs in acute care settings and to identify factors associated with successful implementation of these programs. We searched for new evidence using PubMed from 2005 to September 2012. Two new, large, randomized, controlled trials supported the conclusions of the existing meta-analyses. An optimal bundle of components was not identified. Harms were not systematically examined, but potential harms included increased use of restraints and sedating drugs and decreased efforts to mobilize patients. Eleven studies showed that the following themes were associated with successful implementation: leadership support, engagement of front-line staff in program design, guidance of the prevention program by a multidisciplinary committee, pilot-testing interventions, use of information technology systems to provide data about falls, staff education and training, and changes in nihilistic attitudes about fall prevention. Future research would advance knowledge by identifying optimal bundles of component interventions for particular patients and by determining whether effectiveness relies more on the mix of the components or use of certain implementation strategies.
Topics: Accidental Falls; Hospital Administration; Hospitals; Humans; Inpatients; Leadership; Organizational Culture; Patient Safety; Program Evaluation; Risk Assessment; Safety Management
PubMed: 23460095
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-158-5-201303051-00005 -
Journal of Nursing Management Apr 2020This review aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of structured handovers in improving patient outcomes in the wards.
AIM
This review aimed to elucidate the effectiveness of structured handovers in improving patient outcomes in the wards.
BACKGROUND
Studies have reported that the lack of quality handovers is one of the main causes of adverse effects.
EVALUATION
A search over six electronic databases: MEDLINE; CINAHL; Web of Science; EMBASE; Scopus; and CENTRAL via Ovid concluded nine studies and synthesized by two independent reviewers based on the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses statement was used to guide the undertaking of this review and meta-analysis. All studies published up to February 2019 were considered in this review.
KEY ISSUES
This review has demonstrated that structured handovers reduced the incidences of patient complications, medication errors and general adverse events. However, the results were not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION
Current structured handover formats were effective in reducing problematic handovers such as omission of information, inaccurate information and documentation errors.
IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING MANAGEMENT
Although there is limited high-quality and rigorous research conducted to gain a clearer understanding of the impacts on patient-related outcomes in nursing care, structured handovers remained effective in reducing the number of mistakes in information transfer.
Topics: Humans; Outcome Assessment, Health Care; Patient Handoff; Patient Safety; Social Skills
PubMed: 31859377
DOI: 10.1111/jonm.12936 -
Journal of the American College of... Dec 2021The aim of this study was to identify what parts of the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (WHO SSC) are working, what can be done to make it more... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
The aim of this study was to identify what parts of the World Health Organization Surgical Safety Checklist (WHO SSC) are working, what can be done to make it more effective, and to determine if it achieved its intended effect relative to its design and intended use.
STUDY DESIGN
We conducted a qualitative thematic analysis and meta-meta-analyses of findings in WHO SSC systematic reviews following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines.
RESULTS
Twenty systematic reviews were included for qualitative thematic analysis. Narrative information was coded in 4 primary areas with a focus on impact of the WHO SSC. Four themes-Clinical Outcomes, Process Measures, Team Dynamics and Communication, and Safety Culture-pertained directly to the aims or purposes behind the development of the SSC. The other 2 themes-Efficiency and Workload involved in using the checklist and Checklist Impact on Institutional Practices-are associated with SSC use, but were not focal areas considered during its development. Included in the 20 systematic reviews were 24 unique observational cohort studies that reported pre-post data on a total of 18 clinical outcomes. Mortality, morbidity, surgical site infection, pneumonia, unplanned return to the operating room, urinary tract infection, blood loss requiring transfusion, unplanned intubation, and sepsis favored the use of the WHO SSC. Deep vein thrombosis was the only postoperative outcome assessed that did not favor use of the WHO SSC.
CONCLUSIONS
The WHO SSC positively impacts the things it was explicitly designed to address and does not positively impact things it was not explicitly designed for.
Topics: Checklist; Humans; Operating Rooms; Patient Safety; Postoperative Complications; Process Assessment, Health Care; Qualitative Research; Safety Management; Surgical Procedures, Operative; World Health Organization
PubMed: 34592406
DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2021.08.692 -
Western Journal of Nursing Research Feb 2023This review examined relationships between nurse unit managers' leadership and patient safety and quality of care outcomes in hospital settings. Employing four databases... (Review)
Review
This review examined relationships between nurse unit managers' leadership and patient safety and quality of care outcomes in hospital settings. Employing four databases (CINAHL, Embase, PubMed, and Web of Science) and ancestry searches, we identified 14 English-language, peer-reviewed, primary studies that examined such relationships using quantitative analyses. The studies were published between 2012 and 2021, and most used a cross-sectional design. Each study's quality was assessed using the Mixed-Method Appraisal Tool. In synthesizing results by categorizing outcomes, we found a positive trend in associations between effective nurse unit manager leadership and better outcomes, including fewer patient adverse events, increased nurse error reporting, and higher patient satisfaction and care quality. However, the heterogeneity of leadership measurement approaches and outcomes limited integration of study findings. Future researchers should clearly define study concepts to support interpretation of their findings and should use a suitable theoretical framework to help determine appropriate units of analysis.
Topics: Humans; Leadership; Nurse Administrators; Patient Safety; Cross-Sectional Studies; Quality of Health Care
PubMed: 35876005
DOI: 10.1177/01939459221114079 -
Journal of Biomedical Informatics Dec 2023Content coverage of patient safety ontology and classification systems should be evaluated to provide a guide for users to select appropriate ones for specific... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Content coverage of patient safety ontology and classification systems should be evaluated to provide a guide for users to select appropriate ones for specific applications. In this review, we identified and compare content coverage of patient safety classifications and ontologies.
METHODS
We searched different databases and ontology/classification repositories to identify these classifications and ontologies. We included patient safety-related taxonomies, ontologies, classifications, and terminologies. We identified and extracted different concepts covered by these systems and mapped these concepts to international classification for patient safety (ICPS) and finally compared the content of these systems.
RESULTS
Finally, 89 papers (77 classifications or ontologies) were analyzed. Thirteen classifications have been developed to cover all medical domains. Among specific domain systems, most systems cover medication (16), surgery (8), medical devices (3), general practice (3), and primary care (3). The most common patient safety-related concepts covered in these systems include incident types (41), contributing factors/hazards (31), patient outcomes (29), degree of harm (25), and action (18). However, stage/phase (6), incident characteristics (5), detection (5), people involved (5), organizational outcomes (4), error type (4), and care setting (3) are some of the less covered concepts in these classifications/ontologies.
CONCLUSION
Among general systems, ICPS, World Health Organization's Adverse Reaction Terminology (WHO-ART), and Ontology of Adverse Events (OAE) cover most patient safety concepts and can be used as a gold standard for all medical domains. As a result, reporting systems could make use of these broad classifications, but the majority of their covered concepts are related to patient outcomes, with the exception of ICPS, which covers other patient safety concepts. However, the ICPS does not cover specialized domain concepts. For specific medical domains, MedDRA, NCC MERP, OPAE, ADRO, PPST, OCCME, TRTE, TSAHI, and PSIC-PC provide the broadest coverage of concepts. Many of the patient safety classifications and ontologies are not formally registered or available as formal classification/ontology in ontology repositories such as BioPortal. This study may be used as a guide for choosing appropriate classifications for various applications or expanding less developed patient safety classifications/ontologies. Furthermore, the same concepts are not represented by the same terms; therefore, the current study could be used to guide a harmonization process for existing or future patient safety classifications/ontologies.
Topics: Humans; Patient Safety; Biological Ontologies
PubMed: 37984548
DOI: 10.1016/j.jbi.2023.104549 -
Ontario Health Technology Assessment... 2017A patient safety learning system (sometimes called a critical incident reporting system) refers to structured reporting, collation, and analysis of critical incidents.... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
A patient safety learning system (sometimes called a critical incident reporting system) refers to structured reporting, collation, and analysis of critical incidents. To inform a provincial working group's recommendations for an Ontario Patient Safety Event Learning System, a systematic review was undertaken to determine design features that would optimize its adoption into the health care system and would inform implementation strategies.
METHODS
The objective of this review was to address two research questions: (a) what are the barriers to and facilitators of successful adoption of a patient safety learning system reported by health professionals and (b) what design components maximize successful adoption and implementation? To answer the first question, we used a published systematic review. To answer the second question, we used scoping study methodology.
RESULTS
Common barriers reported in the literature by health care professionals included fear of blame, legal penalties, the perception that incident reporting does not improve patient safety, lack of organizational support, inadequate feedback, lack of knowledge about incident reporting systems, and lack of understanding about what constitutes an error. Common facilitators included a non-accusatory environment, the perception that incident reporting improves safety, clarification of the route of reporting and of how the system uses reports, enhanced feedback, role models (such as managers) using and promoting reporting, legislated protection of those who report, ability to report anonymously, education and training opportunities, and clear guidelines on what to report. Components of a patient safety learning system that increased successful adoption and implementation were emphasis on a blame-free culture that encourages reporting and learning, clear guidelines on how and what to report, making sure the system is user-friendly, organizational development support for data analysis to generate meaningful learning outcomes, and multiple mechanisms to provide feedback through routes to reporters and the wider community (local meetings, email alerts, bulletins, paper contributions, etc.).
CONCLUSIONS
The design of a patient safety learning system can be optimized by an awareness of the barriers to and facilitators of successful adoption and implementation identified by health care professionals. Evaluation of the effectiveness of a patient safety learning system is needed to refine its design.
Topics: Attitude of Health Personnel; Humans; Medical Errors; Patient Safety; Quality Assurance, Health Care; Risk Management
PubMed: 28326148
DOI: No ID Found -
Otolaryngology--head and Neck Surgery :... Jun 2017Objective The breadth and depth of patient safety/quality improvement (PS/QI) research dedicated to otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) education remains... (Review)
Review
Objective The breadth and depth of patient safety/quality improvement (PS/QI) research dedicated to otolaryngology-head and neck surgery (OHNS) education remains unknown. This systematic review aims to define this scope and to identify knowledge gaps as well as potential areas of future study to improved PS/QI education and training in OHNS. Data Sources A computerized Ovid/Medline database search was conducted (January 1, 1965, to May 15, 2015). Similar computerized searches were conducted using Cochrane Database, PubMed, and Google Scholar. Review Methods The study protocol was developed a priori using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA). Articles were classified by year, subspecialty, Institute of Medicine (IOM) Crossing the Chasm categories, and World Health Organization (WHO) subclass. Results Computerized searches yielded 8743 eligible articles, 267 (3.4%) of which met otolaryngology PS/QI inclusion criteria; 51 (19%) were dedicated to resident/fellow education and training. Simulation studies (39%) and performance/competency evaluation (23.5%) were the most common focus. Most projects involved general otolaryngology (47%), rhinology (18%), and otology (16%). Classification by the IOM included effective care (45%), safety/effective care (41%), and effective and efficient care (7.8%). Most research fell into the WHO category of "identifying solutions" (61%). Conclusion Nineteen percent of OHNS PS/QI articles are dedicated to education, the majority of which are simulation and focus on effective care. Knowledges gaps for future research include facial plastics PS/QI and the WHO category of "studies translating evidence into safer care."
Topics: Education, Medical; Humans; Otolaryngology; Patient Safety; Quality Improvement
PubMed: 28441509
DOI: 10.1177/0194599817701112 -
International Journal For Quality in... Feb 2021Prehospital care is potentially hazardous with the possibility for patients to experience an adverse event. However, as compared to secondary care, little is known about...
BACKGROUND
Prehospital care is potentially hazardous with the possibility for patients to experience an adverse event. However, as compared to secondary care, little is known about how patient safety is managed in prehospital care settings.
OBJECTIVES
The objectives of this systematic review were to identify and classify the methods of measuring and monitoring patient safety that have been used in prehospital care using the five dimensions of the Measuring and Monitoring Safety (MMS) framework and use this classification to identify where there are safety 'blind spots' and make recommendations for how these deficits could be addressed.
METHODS
Searches were conducted in January 2020, with no limit on publication year, using Medline, PsycInfo, CINAHL, Web of Science and Academic Search. Reference lists of included studies and existing related reviews were also screened. English-language, peer-reviewed studies concerned with measuring and monitoring safety in prehospital care were included. Two researchers independently extracted data from studies and applied a quality appraisal tool (the Quality Assessment Tool for Studies with Diverse Designs).
RESULTS
A total of 5301 studies were screened, with 52 included in the review. A total of 73% (38/52) of the studies assessed past harm, 25% (13/52) the reliability of safety critical processes, 1.9% (1/52) sensitivity to operations, 38.5% (20/52) anticipation and preparedness and 5.8% (3/52) integration and learning. A total of 67 methods for measuring and monitoring safety were used across the included studies. Of these methods, 38.8% (26/67) were surveys, 29.9% (20/67) were patient records reviews, 14.9% (10/67) were incident reporting systems, 11.9% (8/67) were interviews or focus groups and 4.5% (3/67) were checklists.
CONCLUSIONS
There is no single method of measuring and monitoring safety in prehospital care. Arguably, most safety monitoring systems have evolved, rather than been designed. This leads to safety blind spots in which information is lacking, as well as to redundancy and duplication of effort. It is suggested that the findings from this systematic review, informed by the MMS framework, can provide a structure for critically thinking about how safety is being measured and monitored in prehospital care. This will support the design of a safety surveillance system that provides a comprehensive understanding of what is being done well, where improvements should be made and whether safety interventions have had the desired effect.
Topics: Checklist; Delivery of Health Care; Emergency Medical Services; Humans; Patient Safety; Reproducibility of Results
PubMed: 33459774
DOI: 10.1093/intqhc/mzab013