Effect of a Pharmacy-based Centralized Intravenous Admixture Service on the Prevalence of Medication Errors:A Before-and-After Study

Intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) may lead to patient harm. The primary aim of this study was to assess the effect of a pharmacy-based centralized intravenous admixture service (CIVAS) on IAPEs. METHODS: We conducted a before-and-after study in 3 clinical wards before CIVAS implementation and in the CIVAS unit 18 months after implementation. Intravenous admixture preparation error data were collected by disguised observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of admixtures with 1 or more IAPEs. Secondary outcomes were the type and potential severity of IAPEs, noncompliance to hygiene procedures, and nursing staff satisfaction with the CIVAS. The primary outcome was analyzed using a multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model. RESULTS: One or more IAPEs were identified in 14 of 543 admixtures (2.6%) in the CIVAS unit and in 148 of 282 admixtures (52.5%) in the clinical wards (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.004–0.05). The most common IAPE types were wrong solvent or diluent (n = 95) and wrong volume of infusion fluid (n = 45). No potentially harmful IAPEs occurred in the CIVAS unit as opposed to 22 (7.8%) in the clinical wards. Disinfection procedures were better adhered to in the CIVAS unit. Overall nurse satisfaction with the CIVAS increased from a median of 70 (n = 166) 5 months after intervention to 77 (n = 115) 18 months after intervention (P < 0.001) on a 100-point scale. CONCLUSIONS: Centralized intravenous admixture service performed notably better than the clinical wards with regard to IAPEs and noncompliance to hygiene procedures. Nurses were satisfied with the CIVAS. Hence, the implementation of CIVAS is an important strategy to improve medication safety in hospitals

Prevalence and determinants of intravenous admixture preparation errors:A prospective observational study in a university hospital

Background Intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) may lead to patient harm. Insight into the prevalence as well as the determinants associated with these IAPEs is needed to elicit preventive measures. Aim The primary aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of IAPEs. Secondary aims were to identify the type, severity, and determinants of IAPEs. Method A prospective observational study was performed in a Dutch university hospital. IAPE data were collected by disguised observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of admixtures with one or more IAPEs. Descriptive statistics were used for the prevalence, type, and severity of IAPEs. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the determinants of IAPEs. Results A total of 533 IAPEs occurred in 367 of 614 admixtures (59.8%) prepared by nursing staff. The most prevalent errors were wrong preparation technique (n = 257) and wrong volume of infusion fluid (n = 107). Fifty-nine IAPEs (11.1%) were potentially harmful. The following variables were associated with IAPEs: multistep versus single-step preparations (adjusted odds ratio [OR(adj)] 4.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.27–7.35); interruption versus no interruption (OR(adj) 2.32, CI 1.13–4.74); weekend versus weekdays (OR(adj) 2.12, CI 1.14–3.95); time window 2 p.m.-6 p.m. versus 7 a.m.-10 a.m. (OR(adj) 3.38, CI 1.60–7.15); and paediatric versus adult wards (OR(adj) 0.14, CI 0.06–0.37). Conclusion IAPEs, including harmful IAPEs, occurred frequently. The determinants associated with IAPEs point to factors associated with preparation complexity and working conditions. Strategies to reduce the occurrence of IAPEs and therefore patient harm should target the identified determinants

Prevalence and determinants of intravenous admixture preparation errors: A prospective observational study in a university hospital

Background Intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) may lead to patient harm. Insight into the prevalence as well as the determinants associated with these IAPEs is needed to elicit preventive measures. Aim The primary aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of IAPEs. Secondary aims were to identify the type, severity, and determinants of IAPEs. Method A prospective observational study was performed in a Dutch university hospital. IAPE data were collected by disguised observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of admixtures with one or more IAPEs. Descriptive statistics were used for the prevalence, type, and severity of IAPEs. Mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used to estimate the determinants of IAPEs. Results A total of 533 IAPEs occurred in 367 of 614 admixtures (59.8%) prepared by nursing staff. The most prevalent errors were wrong preparation technique (n = 257) and wrong volume of infusion fluid (n = 107). Fifty-nine IAPEs (11.1%) were potentially harmful. The following variables were associated with IAPEs: multistep versus single-step preparations (adjusted odds ratio [ORadj] 4.08, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.27–7.35); interruption versus no interruption (ORadj 2.32, CI 1.13–4.74); weekend versus weekdays (ORadj 2.12, CI 1.14–3.95); time window 2 p.m.-6 p.m. versus 7 a.m.-10 a.m. (ORadj 3.38, CI 1.60–7.15); and paediatric versus adult wards (ORadj 0.14, CI 0.06–0.37). Conclusion IAPEs, including harmful IAPEs, occurred frequently. The determinants associated with IAPEs point to factors associated with preparation complexity and working conditions. Strategies to reduce the occurrence of IAPEs and therefore patient harm should target the identified determinants

Effect of a Pharmacy-based Centralized Intravenous Admixture Service on the Prevalence of Medication Errors: A Before-and-After Study

Objectives: Intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) may lead to patient harm. The primary aim of this study was to assess the effect of a pharmacy-based centralized intravenous admixture service (CIVAS) on IAPEs. Methods: We conducted a before-and-after study in 3 clinical wards before CIVAS implementation and in the CIVAS unit 18 months after implementation. Intravenous admixture preparation error data were collected by disguised observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of admixtures with 1 or more IAPEs. Secondary outcomes were the type and potential severity of IAPEs, noncompliance to hygiene procedures, and nursing staff satisfaction with the CIVAS. The primary outcome was analyzed using a multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model. Results: One or more IAPEs were identified in 14 of 543 admixtures (2.6%) in the CIVAS unit and in 148 of 282 admixtures (52.5%) in the clinical wards (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.004-0.05). The most common IAPE types were wrong solvent or diluent (n=95) and wrong volume of infusion fluid (n=45). No potentially harmful IAPEs occurred in the CIVAS unit as opposed to 22 (7.8%) in the clinical wards. Disinfection procedures were better adhered to in the CIVAS unit. Overall nurse satisfaction with the CIVAS increased from a median of 70 (n=166) 5 months after intervention to 77 (n=115) 18 months after intervention (P < 0.001) on a 100-point scale. Conclusions: Centralized intravenous admixture service performed notably better than the clinical wards with regard to IAPEs and noncompliance to hygiene procedures. Nurses were satisfied with the CIVAS. Hence, the implementation of CIVAS is an important strategy to improve medication safety in hospitals

Effect of a Pharmacy-based Centralized Intravenous Admixture Service on the Prevalence of Medication Errors: A Before-and-After Study

Objectives Intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) may lead to patient harm. The primary aim of this study was to assess the effect of a pharmacy-based centralized intravenous admixture service (CIVAS) on IAPEs. Methods We conducted a before-and-after study in 3 clinical wards before CIVAS implementation and in the CIVAS unit 18 months after implementation. Intravenous admixture preparation error data were collected by disguised observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of admixtures with 1 or more IAPEs. Secondary outcomes were the type and potential severity of IAPEs, noncompliance to hygiene procedures, and nursing staff satisfaction with the CIVAS. The primary outcome was analyzed using a multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model. Results One or more IAPEs were identified in 14 of 543 admixtures (2.6%) in the CIVAS unit and in 148 of 282 admixtures (52.5%) in the clinical wards (odds ratio, 0.02; 95% confidence interval, 0.004-0.05). The most common IAPE types were wrong solvent or diluent (n=95) and wrong volume of infusion fluid (n=45). No potentially harmful IAPEs occurred in the CIVAS unit as opposed to 22 (7.8%) in the clinical wards. Disinfection procedures were better adhered to in the CIVAS unit. Overall nurse satisfaction with the CIVAS increased from a median of 70 (n=166) 5 months after intervention to 77 (n=115) 18 months after intervention (P < 0.001) on a 100-point scale. Conclusions Centralized intravenous admixture service performed notably better than the clinical wards with regard to IAPEs and noncompliance to hygiene procedures. Nurses were satisfied with the CIVAS. Hence, the implementation of CIVAS is an important strategy to improve medication safety in hospitals

The Relation between Psychiatric Diagnoses and Constipation in Hospitalized Patients : A Cross-Sectional Study

Objective. Constipation is a prevalent problem in patients with psychiatric disorders; it reduces quality of life and may lead to severe complications. The prevalence distribution of constipation across all psychiatric diagnoses in patients with severe mental illness (SMI) has hardly been studied. The aim of this study is to estimate the association between psychiatric disorders and constipation in SMI inpatients. Methods. The strength of the association between constipation (based on use of laxatives) and DSM-IV psychiatric diagnosis was studied in a cross-sectional study with "adjustment disorders" as the reference group. The association was analyzed using logistic regression. Results. Of the 4728 patients, 20.3% had constipation. In the stratum of patients older than 60 years, all psychiatric categories except for substance related disorders were significantly associated with a higher prevalence of constipation (odds ratios ranging from 3.38 to 6.52), whereas no significant associations were found in the stratum of patients between 18 and 60 years (odds ratios ranging from 1.00 to 2.03). Conclusion. In the elderly, all measured psychiatric diagnoses are strongly associated with an increased prevalence of constipation. Physicians should be extra alert for constipation in SMI patients, independent of specific psychiatric diagnoses