Medicine administration errors and their severity in secondary care older persons’ ward: a multi‐centre observational study

Kelly, Jennifer; Wright, David

doi:10.1111/j.1365-2702.2011.03760.x

Cited by 19 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In order for information about a patent's pain derived from pain assessments to be understood in light of the therapeutic trial (and vice-versa), it is essential that the timing of administration of therapy and timing of assessment are accurate. This is also supported by a study published by the Journal of Clinical Nursing in 2012, 168 discussing how 'the fact that the medicine has been signed as being given, when in some cases it is not, makes it difficult for the prescribers to evaluate the effectiveness of the treatment and if carried out repeatedly could lead to loss of control of the patient's disease' In order to assess patient's response to therapy, pain assessment should follow administration of therapy, with enough time for the therapy to have the desired effect FR.m-a.02…”

supporting

confidence: 67%

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

Closs

Dowding

Allcock³

et al. 2016

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Health Services and Delivery ResearchISSN 2050-4349 (Print) ISSN 2050-4357 (Online) This journal is a member of and subscribes to the principles of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (www.publicationethics.org/).Editorial contact: nihredit@southampton.ac.ukThe full HS&DR archive is freely available to view online at www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk/hsdr. Print-on-demand copies can be purchased from the report pages of the NIHR Journals Library website: www.journalslibrary.nihr.ac.uk Criteria for inclusion in the Health Services and Delivery Research journalReports are published in Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) if (1) they have resulted from work for the HS&DR programme or programmes which preceded the HS&DR programme, and (2) they are of a sufficiently high scientific quality as assessed by the reviewers and editors. HS&DR programmeThe Health Services and Delivery Research (HS&DR) programme, part of the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR), was established to fund a broad range of research. It combines the strengths and contributions of two previous NIHR research programmes: the Health Services Research (HSR) programme and the Service Delivery and Organisation (SDO) programme, which were merged in January 2012.The HS&DR programme aims to produce rigorous and relevant evidence on the quality, access and organisation of health services including costs and outcomes, as well as research on implementation. The programme will enhance the strategic focus on research that matters to the NHS and is keen to support ambitious evaluative research to improve health services.For more information about the HS&DR programme please visit the website: http://www.nets.nihr.ac.uk/programmes/hsdr This reportThe research reported in this issue of the journal was funded by the HS&DR programme or one of its preceding programmes as project number 11/2000/05. The contractual start date was in October 2012. The final report began editorial review in October 2015 and was accepted for publication in March 2016. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors and production house have tried to ensure the accuracy of the authors' report and would like to thank the reviewers for their constructive comments on the final report document. However, they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this report.This report presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Heal...

show abstract

supporting

confidence: 67%

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

Closs

Dowding

Allcock³

et al. 2016

Health Serv Deliv Res

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Twenty studies10 11 14 20–36 therefore met our inclusion criteria. Of these, four14 33 34 36 analysed data from previous studies;26 28 30 35 a final 16 unique studies were included. A third reviewer was not required.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Methodological variations and their effects on reported medication administration error rates

2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Published studies indicate that between 1 and 10% of all prescribing [8–11], dispensing [12–14] and medicine administration [15–20] procedures in the UK include errors. Administration of intravenous medicines procedures have been found to have a higher error rate of 49% [21].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of medication incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System in England and Wales over 6 years (2005–2010)

Cousins

Gerrett

Warner

2012

Brit J Clinical Pharma

157

135

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

was undertaken. The 526 186 medication incident reports represented 9.68% of all patient safety incidents. Medication incidents from acute general hospitals (394 951) represented 75% of reports. There were relatively smaller numbers of medication incident reports (44 952) from primary care, representing 8.5% of the total. Of 86 821 (16%) medication incidents reporting actual patient harm, 822 (0.9%) resulted in death or severe harm. The incidents involving medicine administration (263 228; 50%) and prescribing (97 097; 18%) were the process steps with the largest number of reports. Omitted and delayed medicine (82 028; 16%) and wrong dose (80 170; 15%) represented the largest error categories. Thirteen medicines or therapeutic groups accounted for 377 (46%) of the incidents with outcomes of death or severe harm. The National Patient Safety Agency (NPSA) has issued guidance to help minimize incidents with many of these medicines. Many recent incidents could have been prevented if the NPSA guidance had been better implemented. It is recommended that healthcare organizations in all sectors establish an effective infrastructure to oversee and promote safe medication practice, including an annual medication safety report. In the future, preventable harms from medication incidents can be further minimized by; the continued use of the NRLS to identify and prioritize important actions to improve medication safety, a central organization continuing to issue medication safety guidance to the service and better methods to ensure that the National Health Service has implemented this guidance.

show abstract

Medicine administration errors and their severity in secondary care older persons’ ward: a multi‐centre observational study

Abstract: There is a need to decrease the number and severity of MAEs, by increasing nurse awareness and error reporting.

Cited by 19 publications

References 37 publications

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

Towards improved decision support in the assessment and management of pain for people with dementia in hospital: a systematic meta-review and observational study

Methodological variations and their effects on reported medication administration error rates

A review of medication incidents reported to the National Reporting and Learning System in England and Wales over 6 years (2005–2010)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About