Abstract
Introduction Medication errors during paediatric resuscitation are thought to be common. However, there is little evidence about the individual process steps that contribute to such medication errors in this context.
Objectives To describe the incidence, nature and severity of medication errors in simulated paediatric resuscitations, and to employ human reliability analysis to understand the contributory role of individual process step discrepancies to these errors.
Methods We conducted a prospective observational study of simulated resuscitations subject to video micro-analysis, identification of medication errors, severity assessment and human reliability analysis in a large English teaching hospital. Fifteen resuscitation teams of two doctors and two nurses each conducted one of two simulated paediatric resuscitation scenarios.
Results At least one medication error was observed in every simulated case, and a large magnitude or clinically significant error in 11 of 15 cases. Medication errors were observed in 29% of 180 simulated medication administrations, 40% of which considered to be moderate or severe. These errors were the result of 884 observed discrepancies at a number of steps in the drug ordering, preparation and administration stages of medication use, 8% of which made a major contribution to a resultant medication error. Most errors were introduced by discrepancies during drug preparation and administration.
Conclusions Medication errors were common with a considerable proportion likely to result in patient harm. There is an urgent need to optimise existing systems and to commission research into new approaches to increase the reliability of human interactions during administration of medication in the paediatric emergency setting.
Strengths and limitations of this study
This study is one of the first to use HRA methods to link task discrepancies with resultant medication errors, as well as to link these discrepancies directly to potential harm. This effort has demonstrated that a significant fraction of the burden of error in the paediatric emergency drug administration process originates during the preparation and administration phase and that most of these errors are likely to be undetected in clinical practice.
This study was subject to a number of limitations. Although we went to considerable lengths to replicate the paediatric emergency environment, the simulation environment cannot truly reflect the clinical environment during a genuine emergency.
Furthermore, this study was conducted at a single site and participants were not blinded to the purpose of the study, so it is potentially subject to preparation bias.
Participants were recruited from the paediatric emergency unit, intensive care unit and general paediatrics ward and had variable experience of emergency cases. However, all participants worked in clinical units that manage critically ill children.
- Paediatrics
- Paediatric A&E and ambulatory care
- Paediatric anaesthesia
Competing Interest Statement
The Helix Centre at Imperial College London is leading an effort in collaboration with the British National Formulary developing digital tools in an attempt to improve paediatric medication safety. NA has written two patents describing syringe labelling techniques in medication safety. BDF supervises a PhD student part funded by a supplier of hospital electronic health record systems, and has received funding from Pfizer for delivering teaching at a one-off symposium on medication safety. We confirm that we have given due consideration to the protection of intellectual property associated with this work and that there are no impediments to publication, including the timing of publication, with respect to intellectual property. In so doing we confirm that we have followed the regulations of our institution concerning intellectual property.
Funding Statement
NA received funding from the Resuscitation Council (UK) which partially funded elements of the simulations, with the majority of the funding received from the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Imperial Patient Safety Translational Research Centre. Infrastructure support was provided by the NIHR Imperial Biomedical Research Centre (BRC). BDF is supported by the NIHR Health Protection Research Unit in Healthcare Associated Infections and Antimicrobial Resistance at Imperial College London, in partnership with Public Health England (PHE). The views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR or PHE.
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.
Yes
Any clinical trials involved have been registered with an ICMJE-approved registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov and the trial ID is included in the manuscript.
Not Applicable
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant Equator, ICMJE or other checklist(s) as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information
