Comparison of methods for detecting medication errors in 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities.
The validity and cost-effectiveness of three methods for detecting medication errors were examined. A stratified random sample of 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities in Colorado and Georgia was selected. Medication administration errors were detected by registered nurses (R.N.s), licensed pr...
| Publicado en: | American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy Vol. 59; no. 5; pp. 436 - 447 |
|---|---|
| Autores principales: | , , , , |
| Formato: | research tables/charts Journal Article |
| Publicado: |
Oxford University Press / USA
3/1/2002
|
| Acceso en línea: | Ver este registro en EBSCOhost |
| fields | @attributes: recordID: 1 pdfLink: plink: https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ccm&AN=106538546&site=ehost-live header: @attributes: shortDbName: ccm uiTerm: 106538546 longDbName: CINAHL Complete uiTag: AN controlInfo: bkinfo: dissinfo: jinfo: jid: 10792082 1X3 jtl: American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy issn: 10792082 maglogo: N pubinfo: dt: 3/1/2002 vid: 59 iid: 5 pid: 622 pub: Oxford University Press / USA artinfo: ui: 106538546 2009050212 10.1093/ajhp/59.5.436 NLM11887410 106538546 ppf: 436 ppct: 11 formats: fmt: @attributes: type: P tig: atl: Comparison of methods for detecting medication errors in 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities. aug: au: Flynn EA Barker KN Pepper GA Bates DW Mikeal RL affil: Associate Research Professor, Center for Pharmacy Operations and Designs, Department of Pharmacy Care Systems, Harrison School of Pharmacy, Auburn University (AU), Auburn, AL sug: subj: Medication Errors Evaluation Data Collection Methods Evaluation Hospitals Skilled Nursing Facilities Stratified Random Sample Colorado Georgia Registered Nurses Practical Nurses Pharmacy Technicians Record Review Incident Reports Observational Methods Comparative Studies Pharmacists Physicians Descriptive Statistics Costs and Cost Analysis Validity Medication Errors Classification kappa Statistic Chi Square Test Data Analysis Software Accreditation Patient Safety Funding Source Human ab: The validity and cost-effectiveness of three methods for detecting medication errors were examined. A stratified random sample of 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities in Colorado and Georgia was selected. Medication administration errors were detected by registered nurses (R.N.s), licensed practical nurses (L.P.N.s), and pharmacy technicians from these facilities using three methods: incident report review, chart review, and direct observation. Each dose evaluated was compared with the prescriber's order. Deviations were considered errors. Efficiency was measured by the time spent evaluating each dose. A pharmacist performed an independent determination of errors to assess the accuracy of each data collector. Clinical significance was judged by a panel of physicians. Observers detected 300 of 457 pharmacist-confirmed errors made on 2556 doses (11.7% error rate) compared with 17 errors detected by chart reviewers (0.7% error rate), and 1 error detected by incident report review (0.04% error rate). All errors detected involved the same 2556 doses. All chart reviewers and 7 of 10 observers achieved at least good comparability with the pharmacist's results. The mean cost of error detection per dose was $4.82 for direct observation and $0.63 for chart review. The technician was the least expensive observer at $2.87 per dose evaluated. R.N.s were the least expensive chart reviewers at $0.50 per dose. Of 457 errors, 35 (8%) were deemed potentially clinically significant; 71% of these were detected by direct observation. Direct observation was more efficient and accurate than reviewing charts and incident reports in detecting medication errors. Pharmacy technicians were more efficient and accurate than R.N.s and L.P.N.s in collecting data about medication errors. pubtype: Academic Journal doctype: research tables/charts Journal Article ougenre: Article language: English refInfo: holdings: @attributes: islocal: N |
|---|