Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30460407›Full record

Observational studyEuropean journal of pediatrics2019

Incident reports versus direct observation to identify medication errors and risk factors in hospitalised newborns.

David Palmero, Ermindo R Di Paolo, Corinne Stadelmann, André Pannatier, Farshid Sadeghipour, Jean-François Tolsa

Abstract readObservational Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Observational study in European journal of pediatrics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Evaluation and Implementation of KIDs List Recommendations in a University Health System.The journal of pediatric pharmacology and therapeutics : JPPT : the official journal of PPAG · 2022
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

David PalmeroDepartment of Pharmacy, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland. David.Palmero@chuv.ch.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2813-4487
Ermindo R Di PaoloDepartment of Pharmacy, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Corinne StadelmannClinic of Neonatology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
André PannatierDepartment of Pharmacy, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Farshid SadeghipourDepartment of Pharmacy, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.
Jean-François TolsaClinic of Neonatology, Lausanne University Hospital, Lausanne, Switzerland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Newborns are often exposed to medication errors in hospitals. Identification and understanding the causes and risk factors associated with medication errors will help to improve the effectiveness of medication. We sought to compare voluntary incident reports and direct observation in the identification of medication errors. We also identified corresponding risk factors in order to establish measures to prevent medication errors. Medication errors identified by a clinical pharmacist and those recorded in our incident reporting system by caregivers were analysed. Main outcomes were rates, type and severity of medication error, and other variables related to medication errors. Ultimately, 383 medication errors were identified by the clinical pharmacist, and two medication errors were declared by caregivers. Prescription errors accounted for 38.4%, preparation errors for 16.2%, and administration errors for 45.4%. The two variables significantly related to the occurrence of medication errors were gestational age < 32.0 weeks (p = 0.04) and the number of drugs prescribed (p < 0.01).Conclusion: Caregivers underreported the true rate of medication errors. Most medication errors were caused by inattention and could have been limited by simplifying the medication process. Risk of medication errors is increased in newborns < 32.0 weeks and increases with the number of drugs prescribed to each patient. What is Known: • Newborns in hospitals are particularly susceptible to medication errors. • Identification and understanding the reasons for medication errors should help us to establish preventive measures to reduce the occurrence of such errors. What is New: • Direct observation of the medication process, though time consuming, is essential to accurately assess the frequency of medication errors, which are underreported by caregivers. Most medication errors are caused by inattention and could be limited by simplifying the medication process. • The risk of medication errors was significantly increased in very preterm newborns (< 32 weeks) and when the number of prescription per patient increased.

Indexed as

HospitalizationHumansInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMedication ErrorsRisk FactorsRisk ManagementSwitzerlandWatchful WaitingMedication errorsNeonatal intensive care unitNewbornPatient safetyQuality improvementRisk factors

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.