Literature DB >> 28902007

A Comparison of Error Rates Between Intravenous Push Methods: A Prospective, Multisite, Observational Study.

John B Hertig, Daniel D Degnan, Catherine R Scott, Janelle R Lenz, Xiaochun Li, Chelsea M Anderson.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Current literature estimates the error rate associated with the preparation and administration of all intravenous (IV) medications to be 9.4% to 97.7% worldwide. This study aims to compare the number of observed medication preparation and administration errors between the only commercially available ready-to-administer product (Simplist) and IV push traditional practice, including a cartridge-based syringe system (Carpuject) and vials and syringes.
METHODS: A prospective, multisite, observational study was conducted in 3 health systems in various states within the United States between December 2015 and March 2016 to observe IV push medication preparation and administration. Researchers observed a ready-to-administer product and IV push traditional practice using a validated observational method and a modified data collection sheet. All observations were reconciled to the original medication order to determine if any errors occurred.
RESULTS: Researchers collected 329 observations (ready to administer = 102; traditional practice = 227) and observed 260 errors (ready to administer = 25; traditional practice = 235). The overall observed error rate for ready-to-administer products was 2.5%, and the observed error rate for IV push traditional practice was 10.4%.
CONCLUSIONS: The ready-to-administer group demonstrated a statistically significant lower observed error rate, suggesting that use of this product is associated with fewer observed preparation and administration errors in the clinical setting. Future studies should be completed to determine the potential for patient harm associated with these errors and improve clinical practice because it relates to the safe administration of IV push medications.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2018        PMID: 28902007     DOI: 10.1097/PTS.0000000000000419

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Patient Saf        ISSN: 1549-8417            Impact factor:   2.844


  5 in total

1.  A Continuous Observation Workflow Time Study to Assess Intravenous Push Waste.

Authors:  John Hertig; Kaitlyn Jarrell; Prachi Arora; Jonell Nwabueze; Charlotte Moureaud; Daniel D Degnan; Tate Trujillo
Journal:  Hosp Pharm       Date:  2020-06-02

2.  Why the Utilization of Ready-to-Administer Syringes During High-Stress Situations Is More Important Than Ever.

Authors:  Pashmina Malik; Melissa Rangel; Tracy VonBriesen
Journal:  J Infus Nurs       Date:  2022 Jan-Feb 01

3.  Systemic Causes of In-Hospital Intravenous Medication Errors: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Sini Kuitunen; Ilona Niittynen; Marja Airaksinen; Anna-Riia Holmström
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2021-12-01       Impact factor: 2.243

4.  A Cost-Effectiveness Study Comparing Ready-to-Administer and Traditional Vial-and-Syringe Method for Opioids.

Authors:  Prachi Arora; Maria Muehrcke; John Hertig
Journal:  Pain Ther       Date:  2022-06-10

5.  Give Intravenous Bolus Overdose a Brake: User Experience and Perception of Safety Device.

Authors:  Yasmin Yen Yen Ng; Paul Weng Wan; Kim Poh Chan; Guek Gwee Sim
Journal:  J Patient Saf       Date:  2021-03-01       Impact factor: 2.243

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.