Intravenous Smart Pumps During Actual Clinical Use: A Descriptive Comparison of Primary and Secondary Infusion Practices

This descriptive observational study was conducted to increase understanding of medication administration practices during actual clinical use between 2 commonly used, different types of intravenous (IV) smart pumps. Compliance with manufacturer-recommended setup requirements for both primary and secondary infusions and secondary medication administration delay was compared between a head-height differential system and a cassette system. A total of 301 medication administration observations were included in this study: 102 (34%) for the linear peristaltic IV smart pump (medical–surgical: N = 51; critical care: N = 51) and 199 (66%) for the cassette pump (medical–surgical: N = 88; critical care: N = 111). Results found a 0% compliance for primary line setup and 84% compliance for secondary line setup and 1 omitted medication due to a closed clamp with the linear peristaltic system. For the cassette system, there are no head-height requirements. Two roller clamps were found to be in the closed position on initiation of the secondary infusion, but the clinician was alerted by an alarm, so no medication delays occurred. These findings support that the current system requirements for flow rate accuracy using head-height differential systems are difficult to achieve consistently at the point of care. There is a need for additional human factor designed technology to replace manual actions to improve the process of care for nurses and the safety of care for patients

Optimizing the design of preprinted orders for ambulatory chemotherapy: Combining oncology, human factors, and graphic design

Purpose: To establish a set of guidelines for developing ambulatory chemotherapy preprinted orders. Methods: Multiple methods were used to develop the preprinted order guidelines. These included (A) a comprehensive literature review and an environmental scan; (B) analyses of field study observations and incident reports; (C) critical review of evidence from the literature and the field study observation analyses; (D) review of the draft guidelines by a clinical advisory group; and (E) collaboration with graphic designers to develop sample preprinted orders, refine the design guidelines, and format the resulting content. Results: The Guidelines for Developing Ambulatory Chemotherapy Preprinted Orders, which consist of guidance on the design process, content, and graphic design elements of ambulatory chemotherapy preprinted orders, have been established. Conclusion: Health care is a safety critical, dynamic, and complex sociotechnical system. Identifying safety risks in such a system and effectively addressing them often require the expertise of multiple disciplines. This study illustrates how human factors professionals, clinicians, and designers can leverage each other's expertise to uncover commonly overlooked patient safety hazards and to provide health care professionals with innovative, practical, and user-centered tools to minimize those hazards

Healthcare Professionals Risk Assessments for Alert Overrides in High-Risk IV Infusions Using Simulated Scenarios

This study aimed to use healthcare professionals\u27 assessments to calculate expected risk of intravenous (IV) infusion harm for simulated high-risk medications that exceed soft limits and to investigate the impact of relevant risk factors. We designed 30 infusion scenarios for four high-risk medications, propofol, morphine, insulin, and heparin, infused in adult intensive care unit (AICU) and adult medical and surgical care unit (AMSU). A total of 20 pharmacists and 5 nurses provided their assessed expected risk of harm in each scenario. Descriptive statistics, analysis of variance with least square mean, and post hoc test were conducted to test the effects of field limit type, soft (SoftMax), and hard maximum drug limit types (HardMax), and care area-medication combination on risk of harm. The results showed that overdosing scenarios with continuous and bolus dose limit types were assessed with significantly higher risks than those of bolus dose rate type. An overdose infusion in AICU over a large SoftMax was assessed to be of higher risk than over a small one, but not in AMSU. For overdose infusions with three levels of drug amount, greater drug amount in AICU and AMSU was assessed to have higher risk, except insignificant risk difference between the infusions with higher and moderate drug amount in AMSU. This study obtained expected risk for simulated high-risk IV infusions and found that different field limit and SoftMax types can affect expected risk based on healthcare professionals\u27 perspectives. The findings will be regarded as benchmarks for validating risk quantification models in future research