Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27436991›Full record

ArticleBMC nursing2016

Medication administration error reporting and associated factors among nurses working at the University of Gondar referral hospital, Northwest Ethiopia, 2015.

Berhanu Boru Bifftu, Berihun Assefa Dachew, Bewket Tadesse Tiruneh, Debrework Tesgera Beshah

Abstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in BMC nursing, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 31 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
31citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

31 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Berhanu Boru BifftuDepartment of Nursing, University of Gondar College of Medicine and Health Science, P. O. Box: 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Berihun Assefa DachewDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Institute of Public Health, University of Gondar College of Medicine and Health Science, P. O. Box: 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Bewket Tadesse TirunehDepartment of Nursing, University of Gondar College of Medicine and Health Science, P. O. Box: 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.
Debrework Tesgera BeshahDepartment of Nursing, University of Gondar College of Medicine and Health Science, P. O. Box: 196, Gondar, Ethiopia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMedication administration is the final step/phase of medication process in which its error directly affects the patient health. Due to the central role of nurses in medication administration, whether they are the source of an error, a contributor, or an observer they have the professional, legal and ethical responsibility to recognize and report. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of medication administration error reporting and associated factors among nurses working at The University of Gondar Referral Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.

methodsInstitution based quantitative cross - sectional study was conducted among 282 Nurses. Data were collected using semi-structured, self-administered questionnaire of the Medication Administration Errors Reporting (MAERs). Binary logistic regression with 95 % confidence interval was used to identify factors associated with medication administration errors reporting.

resultsThe estimated medication administration error reporting was found to be 29.1 %. The perceived rates of medication administration errors reporting for non-intravenous related medications were ranged from 16.8 to 28.6 % and for intravenous-related from 20.6 to 33.4 %. Education status (AOR =1.38, 95 % CI: 4.009, 11.128), disagreement over time - error definition (AOR = 0.44, 95 % CI: 0.468, 0.990), administrative reason (AOR = 0.35, 95 % CI: 0.168, 0.710) and fear (AOR = 0.39, 95 % CI: 0.257, 0.838) were factors statistically significant for the refusal of reporting medication administration errors at p-value <0.05.

conclusionIn this study, less than one third of the study participants reported medication administration errors. Educational status, disagreement over time - error definition, administrative reason and fear were factors statistically significant for the refusal of errors reporting at p-value <0.05. Therefore, the results of this study suggest strategies that enhance the cultures of error reporting such as providing a clear definition of reportable errors and strengthen the educational status of nurses by the health care organization.

Indexed as

Errors reportingMedication administrationNurses

Identifiers

PMID27436991
PMCPMC4949890

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.