Carolina Justus Buhrer Ferreira1, Caroline Koga Plodek2, Franciny Kossemba Soares2, Rayza Assis de Andrade3, Fernanda Teleginski4, Maria Dagmar da Rocha5. 1. MSc, Assistant Professor, Departamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil. , Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Departamento de Ciências Farmacêuticas, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa PR , Brazil. 2. Pharmacists, Brazil. 3. Pharmacist, Student, curso de "Residência Multiprofissional em Saúde do Idoso", Hospital Universitário Regional dos Campos Gerais, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil. , Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Hospital Universitário Regional dos Campos Gerais, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa PR , Brazil. 4. Undergraduate student in Pharmaceutics, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil., Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa PR , Brazil. 5. Assistant Professor, Departamento de Enfermagem e Saúde Pública, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil., Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Departamento de Enfermagem e Saúde Pública, Universidade Estadual de Ponta Grossa, Ponta Grossa PR , Brazil.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: to analyze the impact of guidelines regarding errors in medications prescribed for administration through enteral tubes. METHOD: quantitative study, in three phases, undertaken in internal medicine, neurology and an intensive care unit in a general teaching hospital. In Phase 1, the following was undertaken: a protocol for dilution and unit-dose repackaging and administration for 294 medications via enteral tubes; a decision flowchart; operational-standard procedures for dilution and unit-dose repackaging of oral pharmaceutical forms and for administration of medications through enteral tubes. In phase 2, errors in 872 medications prescribed through enteral tubes, in 293 prescriptions for patients receiving inpatient treatment between March and June, were investigated. This was followed by training of the teams in relation to the guidelines established. In Phase 3, pharmaceutical errors and interventions in 945 medications prescribed through enteral tubes, in 292 prescriptions of patients receiving inpatient treatment between August and September, were investigated prospectively. The data collected, in a structured questionnaire, were compiled in the Microsoft Office Excel(r) program, and frequencies were calculated. RESULTS: 786 errors were observed, 63.9% (502) in Phase 2, and 36.1% (284) in Phase 3. In Phase 3, a reduction was ascertained in the frequency of prescription of medications delivered via enteral tubes, medications which were contraindicated, and those for which information was not available. CONCLUSION: guidelines and pharmaceutical interventions were determined in the prevention of errors involving medications delivered through enteral tubes. OBJETIVO: analisar o impacto de diretrizes sobre erros em medicamentos prescritos para administração via sondas enterais. MÉTODO: estudo quantitativo, em três fases, realizado em clínica médica, neurologia e unidade de terapia intensiva de hospital geral universitário. Na Fase 1 elaborou-se: protocolo de diluição, unitarização - transformação e administração para 294 medicamentos via sondas enterais; fluxograma decisório; procedimentos operacionais-padrão de diluição e unitarização de formas farmacêuticas orais e de administração de medicamentos via sondas enterais. Na Fase 2 investigou-se, retrospectivamente, erros em 872 medicamentos prescritos via sondas enterais, em 293 prescrições de pacientes internados de março a junho. Seguiu-se capacitação das equipes sobre diretrizes estabelecidas. Na Fase 3 investigou-se, prospectivamente, erros e intervenções farmacêuticas em 945 medicamentos prescritos via sondas enterais, em 292 prescrições de pacientes internados de agosto a setembro. Dados coletados, em formulário estruturado, foram compilados no programa Microsoft Office Excel(r) e calculadas as frequências. RESULTADOS: foram observados 786 erros, 63,9% (502) na Fase 2 e 36,1% (284) na Fase 3. Na Fase 3 verificou-se redução na frequência de prescrição de medicamentos, via sondas enterais, contraindicados e sem informações disponíveis. CONCLUSÃO: diretrizes e intervenções farmacêuticas foram determinantes na prevenção dos erros de medicamentos via sondas enterais. OBJETIVO: analizar el impacto de directrices sobre errores en medicamentos prescritos para administración vía sondas enterales. MÉTODO: estudio cuantitativo, en tres fases, realizado en una clínica médica-neurología y en unidad de terapia intensiva de un hospital general universitario. En la Fase 1 se elaboró: protocolo de dilución, reenvasado - transformación y administración para 294 medicamentos vía sondas enterales; diagrama de flujo de decisión; procedimientos operacionales estándar de dilución y reenvasado - transformación de formas farmacéuticas orales y de administración de medicamentos vía sondas enterales. En la Fase 2 se investigó, retrospectivamente, errores en 872 medicamentos prescritos vía sondas enterales, en 293 prescripciones de pacientes internados de marzo a junio. La continuación, capacitación de los equipos sobre directrices establecidas. En la Fase 3 se investigó, prospectivamente, errores e intervenciones farmacéuticas en 945 medicamentos prescritos vía sondas enterales, en 292 prescripciones de pacientes internados de agosto a septiembre. Datos fueron colectados en un formulario estructurado, compilados en el programa Microsoft Office Excel(r) y se calcularon las frecuencias. RESULTADOS: se observaron 786 errores, 63,9% (502) en la Fase 2 y 36,1% (284) en la Fase 3. En la Fase 3 se verificó una reducción en la frecuencia de prescripción de medicamentos, vía sondas enterales, contraindicados y sin informaciones disponibles. CONCLUSIÓN: las directrices e intervenciones farmacéuticas fueron determinantes en la prevención de los errores de medicamentos vía sondas enterales.
OBJECTIVE: to analyze the impact of guidelines regarding errors in medications prescribed for administration through enteral tubes. METHOD: quantitative study, in three phases, undertaken in internal medicine, neurology and an intensive care unit in a general teaching hospital. In Phase 1, the following was undertaken: a protocol for dilution and unit-dose repackaging and administration for 294 medications via enteral tubes; a decision flowchart; operational-standard procedures for dilution and unit-dose repackaging of oral pharmaceutical forms and for administration of medications through enteral tubes. In phase 2, errors in 872 medications prescribed through enteral tubes, in 293 prescriptions for patients receiving inpatient treatment between March and June, were investigated. This was followed by training of the teams in relation to the guidelines established. In Phase 3, pharmaceutical errors and interventions in 945 medications prescribed through enteral tubes, in 292 prescriptions of patients receiving inpatient treatment between August and September, were investigated prospectively. The data collected, in a structured questionnaire, were compiled in the Microsoft Office Excel(r) program, and frequencies were calculated. RESULTS: 786 errors were observed, 63.9% (502) in Phase 2, and 36.1% (284) in Phase 3. In Phase 3, a reduction was ascertained in the frequency of prescription of medications delivered via enteral tubes, medications which were contraindicated, and those for which information was not available. CONCLUSION: guidelines and pharmaceutical interventions were determined in the prevention of errors involving medications delivered through enteral tubes. OBJETIVO: analisar o impacto de diretrizes sobre erros em medicamentos prescritos para administração via sondas enterais. MÉTODO: estudo quantitativo, em três fases, realizado em clínica médica, neurologia e unidade de terapia intensiva de hospital geral universitário. Na Fase 1 elaborou-se: protocolo de diluição, unitarização - transformação e administração para 294 medicamentos via sondas enterais; fluxograma decisório; procedimentos operacionais-padrão de diluição e unitarização de formas farmacêuticas orais e de administração de medicamentos via sondas enterais. Na Fase 2 investigou-se, retrospectivamente, erros em 872 medicamentos prescritos via sondas enterais, em 293 prescrições de pacientes internados de março a junho. Seguiu-se capacitação das equipes sobre diretrizes estabelecidas. Na Fase 3 investigou-se, prospectivamente, erros e intervenções farmacêuticas em 945 medicamentos prescritos via sondas enterais, em 292 prescrições de pacientes internados de agosto a setembro. Dados coletados, em formulário estruturado, foram compilados no programa Microsoft Office Excel(r) e calculadas as frequências. RESULTADOS: foram observados 786 erros, 63,9% (502) na Fase 2 e 36,1% (284) na Fase 3. Na Fase 3 verificou-se redução na frequência de prescrição de medicamentos, via sondas enterais, contraindicados e sem informações disponíveis. CONCLUSÃO: diretrizes e intervenções farmacêuticas foram determinantes na prevenção dos erros de medicamentos via sondas enterais. OBJETIVO: analizar el impacto de directrices sobre errores en medicamentos prescritos para administración vía sondas enterales. MÉTODO: estudio cuantitativo, en tres fases, realizado en una clínica médica-neurología y en unidad de terapia intensiva de un hospital general universitario. En la Fase 1 se elaboró: protocolo de dilución, reenvasado - transformación y administración para 294 medicamentos vía sondas enterales; diagrama de flujo de decisión; procedimientos operacionales estándar de dilución y reenvasado - transformación de formas farmacéuticas orales y de administración de medicamentos vía sondas enterales. En la Fase 2 se investigó, retrospectivamente, errores en 872 medicamentos prescritos vía sondas enterales, en 293 prescripciones de pacientes internados de marzo a junio. La continuación, capacitación de los equipos sobre directrices establecidas. En la Fase 3 se investigó, prospectivamente, errores e intervenciones farmacéuticas en 945 medicamentos prescritos vía sondas enterales, en 292 prescripciones de pacientes internados de agosto a septiembre. Datos fueron colectados en un formulario estructurado, compilados en el programa Microsoft Office Excel(r) y se calcularon las frecuencias. RESULTADOS: se observaron 786 errores, 63,9% (502) en la Fase 2 y 36,1% (284) en la Fase 3. En la Fase 3 se verificó una reducción en la frecuencia de prescripción de medicamentos, vía sondas enterales, contraindicados y sin informaciones disponibles. CONCLUSIÓN: las directrices e intervenciones farmacéuticas fueron determinantes en la prevención de los errores de medicamentos vía sondas enterales.
Routinely, in hospital practice, when patients are fed via Enteral Nutrition (EN) and do
not present efficacious swallowing, or are at risk of pulmonary aspiration, enteral
tubes are also used for the administration of medications
.As health establishments have the duty to promote safe practices in the use of
medications, in compliance with the Protocol for Safety in Prescription, Use and
Administration of Medications, an integral part of the National Patient Safety
Program
,
, it is the responsibility of the health team to appropriately prescribe, handle
and administer medications through enteral tubes, avoiding complications and failures in
the nutritional and drug therapies
-
.As a result, it is important to investigate the principal aspects which restrict or
contra-indicate the administration of medications through enteral tubes. Thus, it is
possible to select the drug and/or pharmaceutical form with the least probability of
provoking complications, to undertake dilutions or transformations of medications, when
necessary, and use an appropriate administration technique
-
.The principal aspects which restrict or contra-indicate the administration of
medications via enteral tubes are: 1) obstructions of the enteral tubes, 2)
interactions, 3) changes in the pharmacokinetics, 4) adverse gastrointestinal effects
and 5) reduction or loss of effectiveness and safety in the processes of dilution or
transformation of the drug.Obstructions of enteral tubes, besides entailing reduction in the absorption of the drug
and/or of nutrients, can lead to the substitution of the tube, exposing the patient to
the risks of a new procedure and additional costs, involving radiological materials and
examinations for confirming its positioning
. Although more comfortable for the patient, the tubes which are most prone to
obstructing are those with smaller calibers - 5 to 12 French - 1.65 to 3.96 millimeters
in diameter
. The following may be cited as causes of obstructions: high viscosity and
insufficient flow of the EN, drug/EN incompatibility, adherence of the drug to the
enteral tube and specific characteristics of the drug or of the pharmaceutical form.Interactions can occur between the drug and the nutrients
and between two or more drugs, if administered concomitantly. In order to avoid
interactions between drugs, when it is necessary to administer more than one medication
at the same time, and these should be administered separately, the enteral tubes should
be flushed with water between each drug
.Alterations in the pharmacokinetics can occur because it was not planned for the
medications to be administered through enteral tubes and because administration through
this route entails modifications in the absorption of the drug.Gastrointestinal effects can be caused principally by oral liquid formulations
. The osmolarity is one of the physical characteristics which determine the
organism's tolerance to a formulation. The closer the osmolarity of the formulation
administered is to that of the gastrointestinal secretions - approximately from 100 to
400mOsm/kg, the greater the tolerance will be. Any liquid formulation, whose osmolarity
is higher than 1000mOsm/kg, such as the syrups, can cause abdominal distention, nausea,
intestinal spasms and diarrhea, principally when administered directly into the small
intestine
. Many sweeteners, including mannitol, lactose, sorbitol, saccharin and sucrose,
can cause or worsen situations of diarrhea. Among these, the excipient which is most
prone to adverse gastrointestinal reactions is sorbitol, which is an inactive component,
used as a sweetening agent in order to improve flavor and stability. Doses superior to
10 g per day can cause abdominal distention and flatulence, while 20 g per day can cause
an osmotic laxative effect, resulting in diarrhea and abdominal spasms
,
.When possible, oral liquid pharmaceutical forms are the formulations of first choice for
administration via enteral tubes. However, when a liquid oral pharmaceutical form is
inappropriate, or is not available, solid oral pharmaceutical forms can be used for
administration through enteral tubes
,
. This process, called transformation or derivation, occurs when one
pharmaceutical form is elaborated based on the manipulation of another, so long as that
the drug's
stability is preserved and safety is guaranteed.Within this context, in the present work, the objectives were to analyze the impact of
guidelines regarding errors in medications prescribed for administration through enteral
tubes.
Method
The present quantitative study was undertaken in 3 phases in a general teaching hospital
in the interior of Paraná, Brazil.
Phase 1
Dilution and unit-dose repackaging protocol - transformation and
administration of medications, via enteral tubes
For the elaboration of the document, a non-systematic review was undertaken in
articles, books, databases and through consultations with manufacturers. For the
selection of articles, the PubMed database, of the Medline library (Medical
Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online) was used. Articles published
between 1995 and 2014, in English, Spanish or Portuguese, were researched. The
descriptors used in various combinations were: administration, dosage forms, drug,
enteral, excipients, feeding tubes, hospital pharmacy, interactions, medicines,
nasoenteric, nasogastric, nursing practice, nutrition, pharmaceutical
preparations, route.For the 294 standardized oral medications, information was made available
regarding pharmaceutical form and presentation, storage conditions, possibility of
administration via enteral tube, description of the restriction/contraindication
of administration via enteral tube, recommendations for dilution or unit-dose
repackaging; stability following dilution or unit-dose repackaging and
recommendations for administration via enteral tubes.Inclusion of pharmaceutical alternatives in the institutional therapeutic arsenalThe standardized oral pharmaceutical forms were analyzed regarding the possibility
of administration via enteral tubes and, for those with restrictions or
contraindications, first choice pharmaceutical alternatives included on the list
of the Institution's standardized medications were established, considering
effectiveness and safety.
Elaboration of the decision flowchart
In order to guide the health team and standardized decision-making in relation to
the use of medications via enteral tubes, a flowchart was established (Figure 1) - based on the protocol established -
divided in three stages: analysis of possibilities for use of the drug via enteral
tubes, use of the pharmaceutical form via enteral tubes, and alteration of the
route of administration.
Figure 1
Flowchart for the use of medications via enteral tubes
Establishment of pharmaceutical interventions
The following were established as pharmaceutical interventions to be undertaken in
Phase 3: 1) Request to change pharmaceutical form, 2) request for change of route
of administration, 3) request for change of drug, 4) guidance regarding the need
for a pause in the administration of enteral nutrition in order to administer the
medication, 5) guidance regarding the distal position of the enteral tube and 6)
guidance regarding the slow administration of the medication.
Elaboration and review of standard operating procedures
Bearing in mind the need for adaptation of the pharmaceutical forms to
administration via enteral tubes, the standard operational procedure for dilution
and unit-dose repackaging of oral pharmaceutical forms was elaborated by the
Hospital Pharmacy Service, adapting the process to the relevant legislation and to
the information from the institutional protocol.In the same way, the standard operating procedure for administration of
medications via enteral tubes was revised, to encompass a pause in the infusion of
enteral nutrition and the volume of water to be infused, in accordance with the
caliber of the tube, before and after each individualized administration of
medications.
Definition of the categories of recommendation for administration of
medications via enteral tubes
In line with the information from the institutional protocol, the categories of
recommendation for administration via enteral tubes of medications in the
standardized solid and liquid oral pharmaceutical forms were defined: Permitted
with Restrictions (PR), Contraindicated (CI), and Permitted without Restrictions
(P).For the analysis of the errors in prescribed medications, via enteral tubes, error
was attributed when the medication was not prescribed in accordance with the
restrictions established (PR) and when CI medication was prescribed. Error was not
attributed when the PR medication was prescribed with the established restrictions
and when the P medication was prescribed. Medications for which no information was
available were considered in the study, but were not attributed to the "with
errors" groups or the "without errors" groups.
The elaboration of the structured data collection questionnaire
The structured questionnaire elaborated was divided into two parts. The first
contained the medical records number, date, and unit of hospitalization, and the
total number of medications prescribed. The second analyzed the prescribed
medication for administration via enteral tube, pharmaceutical form and
concentration, categories of recommendation (PR, CI and P) or without information
available, prescription with restriction, prescription without restriction, and
errors.
Phase 2
Errors in 872 medications prescribed for administration via enteral tubes were
investigated, retrospectively, in 293 prescriptions of hospitalized patients, between
March and June 2014.
Training
In July 2014, technical meetings were held with the nursing teams and medical
teams. The issues discussed were: 1) protocol for dilution, unit-dose repackaging
and administration of medications via enteral tubes, 2) decision-making flowchart
and 3) administration of medications via enteral tubes. In the same period, with
the Hospital Pharmacy Service team, besides the issues discussed with the nursing
and medical teams, the following were addressed: 1) standard operating procedure
for dilution and unit-dose repackaging of oral pharmaceutical forms and 2)
pharmaceutical interventions.
Phase 3
Data collection
The data from Phase 3 were collected, prospectively, in 292 prescription order
forms of patients hospitalized between August and September 2014. Errors were
investigated in 945 medications prescribed for administration via enteral tubes
and 574 pharmaceutical interventions undertaken in pharmaceutical progress
records.
Sample
The sample included all the standardized medications, as approved by the
institution's Pharmacy and Therapy Commission, prescribed for adult patients, of
both sexes, receiving inpatient treatment in the hospital in the data collection
periods, in the Internal Medicine Inpatient Units, Neurology units and Intensive
Care Unit (ICU). Nonstandardized medications and those prescribed to patients
hospitalized in units not included in the study were excluded from the sample.
Analysis of the data
The data were compiled using a Microsoft Office Excel(r) spreadsheet
and, based on these, the absolute and relative frequencies were calculated.The present study was approved beforehand by the Commission for Ethics in Research
Involving Human Beings of the State University of Ponta Grossa, Brazil, under
Opinion N. 681.157.
Results
The 294 medications, in the standardized solid and liquid oral pharmaceutical forms,
were analyzed in relation to the possibility of administration via enteral tubes, for
the elaboration of the institutional protocol. Of these, the majority was classified as
PR and P - respectively, 27.6% (81) and 30.6% (90), while for 24.1% (71), a lack of
information available was observed, as shown in Table
1.
Table 1
Categories of recommendation for the administration via enteral tubes of
medications in the standardized solid and liquid oral pharmaceutical forms.
Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil, 2014
Categories of recommendation for
the administration via enteral tubes of medications in the standardized
solid and liquid oral pharmaceutical forms
n
%
PR*
81
27.6
CI†
52
17.7
P‡
90
30.6
Information not available
71
24.1
Total
294
100
*Permitted with restrictions; †Contraindicated; ‡ Permitted without
restrictions.
*Permitted with restrictions; †Contraindicated; ‡ Permitted without
restrictions.In Phase 2 and Phase 3, respectively, 293 and 292 prescriptions were investigated, in
which 4587 and 4752 medications prescribed, respectively, were analyzed (Table 2). Of these, 872 (19%) and 945 (19.9%) were
prescribed for administration via enteral tubes; most of which, in both phases, were
observed in ICU - 48.0% (419/872) and 67.6% (639/945), respectively.
Table 2
Medications prescribed, and medications prescribed via enteral tubes. Ponta
Grossa, PR, Brazil, 2014
Inpatient units
Medications prescribed
Medications prescribed for
administration via enteral tubes
Mean of medications prescribed
for administration via enteral tubes/prescription
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 2
Phase 3
Phase 2
Phase 3
n
%
n
%
n
%
n
%
Internal Medicine
925
20.2
348
7.3
204
23.4
80
8.5
3.2
3.3
Neurology
1,096
23.9
926
19.5
249
28.6
226
23.9
3.5
3.5
ICU*
2,566
55.9
3.478
73.2
419
48.0
639
67.6
2.7
3.1
Total
4,587
100
4.752
100
872
100
945
100
2.9
3.2
*Intensive care unit
*Intensive care unitAccording to Table 2, the mean of medications
prescribed for administration via enteral tubes by prescription remained constant in
Internal Medicine and Neurology; however, when the phases were compared, the means for
ICU (from 2.7 to 3.1) and the global mean (from 2.9 to 3.2) were greater.As shown in Figure 2, 786 errors were observed,
these being 502 (63.9%) in Phase 2 and 284 (36.1%) in Phase 3.
Figure 2
Frequency of prescription (%) and errors in prescribed medications for
administration via enteral tubes. Ponta Grossa, PR, Brazil, 2014
The frequency of the prescription of CI medication reduced significantly - to less than
1%, from Phase 2 to Phase 3; in Internal Medicine the change was from 7.8% to 0.0%, in
Neurology from 18.9% to 0.4%, and in ICU from 7.4% to 0.8% (Figure 2).The frequency of the prescription without restrictions for P medication doubled, when
Phases 2 and 3 were compared, in Internal Medicine (from 23.5% to 57.5%) and ICU (from
28.9% to 66.6%); however, in Neurology, it remained constant (from 53.8% to 54.0%), as
shown in Figure 2.It was observed that, from Phase 2 to Phase 3, there was an increase in the frequency of
prescription with restrictions for PR medications only in Internal Medicine and ICU,
from 0.0% to 13.8% and 3.1%, respectively (Figure
2).In Figure 2, it is demonstrated that the frequency
of prescription of medications without information available for administration via
enteral tubes reduced from 5.4% to 0.0% in Internal Medicine and 9.4% in ICU (from 11.7%
to 2.3%).The pharmaceutical interventions undertaken most frequently in Internal Medicine were
guidance regarding the distal position of the naso-enteric feeding tube: 51.0% (27/53),
and guidance regarding the slow administration of the medication: 33.9% (18/53), as
shown in Table 3.
Table 3
Frequency of pharmaceutical interventions undertaken in prescribed
medications for administration via enteral tubes with errors. Ponta Grossa, PR,
Brazil, 2014
Pharmaceutical interventions
Internal Medicine
Neurology
ICU*
n
%
n
%
n
%
Request for change in the
pharmaceutical form
-
-
-
-
-
-
Request for changing the route of
administration
-
-
-
-
5
1.3
Request for change of drug
-
-
1
0.7
2
0.5
Guidance regarding the need for a
pause in the administration of the enteral nutrition for the
administration of the medication
8
15.1
57
39.3
114
30.3
Guidance regarding the distal
position of the naso-enteric feeding tube
27
51.0
81
55.9
188
50.1
Guidance regarding the slow
administration of the medication
18
33.9
6
4.1
67
17.8
Total (n=574)
53
100
145
100
376
100
*Intensive care unit
*Intensive care unitIn Table 3, one can observe that the
pharmaceutical interventions undertaken most frequently in Neurology and ICU were,
respectively, guidance relating to the need for a pause in the administration of the
enteral nutrition for the administration of the medication: 39.3% (57/145) and 30.3%
(114/376), and guidance relating to the distal position of the naso-enteric feeding
tube: 55.9% (81/145) and 50.1% (188/376).In Figure 2 and in Table 3, in Phase 3, it was possible to observe a ratio of 2.0 pharmaceutical
interventions undertaken per medication prescribed for administration via enteral tubes
with errors (574/284).
Discussion
The administration of medications via enteral tubes is an off-label use, that is, the
manufacturers do not evaluate the same and few references bring information on the
issue. In one prospective study, undertaken by a drugs information center of a private
hospital
, there were divergences between the information from manufacturers and
bibliographic sources consulted, in relation to the recommendations for the use of
medications via enteral tubes, in 39.5% of the consultations made.In the present study, information was found in the references consulted for 75.9% of the
standardized medications analyzed. This value is higher than the 58% found by other
authors
. The lack of information available for 24.1% of the medications could be a
limiting factor for this study; however, in Phase 3, there was a drop in the frequency
of prescription of medications without information available of 5.4% in Internal
Medicine and 9.4% in ICU.In one review involving 234 standardized solid oral medications in the hospital,
regarding the possibility of administration via enteral tubes, 57 alternatives in the
liquid pharmaceutical form were found and suggested
. In another study
, for 48% of the medications prescribed for administration via enteral tubes,
there was an alternative standardized pharmaceutical form in the institution. In the
same way, in one work undertaken in a teaching hospital, 38.2% (26/68) of the solid oral
medications had substitutes in the liquid pharmaceutical form
.In this research, after the analysis undertaken in the elaboration of the Protocol, 15
first choice alternatives, available on the Brazilian market, were included in the list
of the Institution's standardized medications. This previous analysis of the therapeutic
arsenal may clarify why the pharmaceutical intervention of substitution of
pharmaceutical form was not undertaken in this study, as occurs in other studies
,
-
.In the study undertaken in an intensive care unit in a teaching hospital, where there
was no institutional protocol available, 30 pharmaceutical interventions were
undertaken, and, of these, 10.0% were requests to change the medication
. These results differ from those found in this study, as when it was not
possible to establish pharmaceutical alternatives, the pharmaceutical interventions of
request for changing the medication and request for alteration of route of
administration were not made frequently.It is important to take into account that 17.7% (52/294) of the medications were
considered as administration contraindicated via enteral tube and that this, although
inferior to the 40.8% found in another study
, is a significant number. However, in Phase 3, there was a significant reduction
in the frequency of prescription of medication whose administration is contraindicated
(less than 1%) in all the inpatient units. This result may explain the small number of
interventions of request for changing the medication and request for alteration of route
of administration and, furthermore, demonstrates the importance of the elaboration and
reviewing of processes, of the Protocol, and of the pharmaceutical interventions.In Brazil, in spite of what is stipulated in legislation, the undertaking of the
unit-dose repackaging of medications by the pharmacist is not common. In two studies
undertaken in public hospitals, in which the nursing team undertook the unit-dose
repackaging, the results found were similar
-
. It was observed that the transformation was undertaken without knowledge of the
restrictions and contraindications which involve this process and, if more than one
medication was prescribed for the same time, the same were administered at the same time
and using the same syringe. In another, retrospective, study, undertaken in a teaching
hospital, following the implantation of pharmacotherapeutic treatment of patients using
enteral tubes, of the 267 pharmaceutical interventions undertaken, 53.18% (142) were
guidance regarding crushing and reconstitution, given to the Nursing team
. In one study undertaken in an intensive care unit, where nursing technicians
prepared the medications for administration via enteral tubes, the authors found error
rates in the procedures of over 40%
.This study is results differ from the literature in relation to the pharmaceutical
interventions of recommendations for dilution or unit-dose repackaging to the Nursing
team, as when the Protocol was elaborated, the processes of unit-dose repackaging and
dilution to be undertaken by the Hospital Pharmacy Service were established immediately
prior to the administration of the medications via enteral tubes.The request for a pause in the administration of enteral nutrition, for the
administration of medication, was one of the pharmaceutical administrations undertaken
the most frequently in Neurology (39.3%) and ICU (30.3%). This is a relevant procedure,
as obstructions in enteral tubes occur mainly due to the incorrect administration of
medications through the same. Considering this fact, in addition to the procedure of
administration of medications via enteral tubes having been revised, a pause was
established in the administration of enteral nutrition 1hr before and 2hrs after the
administration of medication, for various drugs, such as: ampicillin, atenolol,
captopril, cephalexin, ciprofloxacin, digoxin, doxycycline, phenytoin, potassium
phenoxymethylpenicillin, fluoxetine, glibenclamide, haloperidol, aluminum hydroxide,
magnesium hydroxide, ibuprofen, metoclopramide, norfloxacin and warfarin sodium.One of the present study's limitations was the short space of time - 30 days, between
Phases 2 and 3; however, as this is a teaching hospital, new practices and knowledges
are rapidly incorporated into daily practice.Perhaps the most important finding of the study was the drop in the quantity of
medications prescribed with errors and in the frequency of prescription of medications
without information available for administration via enteral tubes. A significant
reduction was ascertained in the prescription of CI medication and the restrictions of
PR medication were observed in the prescription. This result demonstrates that the
elaboration and review of processes, the development of the institutional Protocol, and
the pharmaceutical interventions undertaken were essential for ensuring greater safety
and effectiveness in the use of medications via enteral tubes, bringing relevant
advances for the health team.
Conclusion
The quantitative data obtained demonstrate that the pharmaceutical interventions were
decisive for identifying and correcting the errors in medications prescribed via enteral
tubes. However, the inclusion of pharmaceutical alternatives, the establishment of a
decision-making flowchart and of an institutional Protocol with directives for
transformation, dilution and administration of standardized medications were determinant
in the prevention of errors resulting from the administration of medications via enteral
tubes, with important advances for the health team.