Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30728945›Full record

ArticleTherapeutic advances in drug safety2019

Medication safety in emergency medical services: approaching an evidence-based method of verification to reduce errors.

Paul Misasi, Joseph R Keebler

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutic advances in drug safety, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. How safe is prehospital care? A systematic review.International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Human errors in emergency medical services: a qualitative analysis of contributing factors.Scandinavian journal of trauma, resuscitation and emergency medicine · 2024
    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

2 authors.

Paul MisasiWichita State University, 1845 N. Fairmount, Wichita, KS, 67260, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5437-5698
Joseph R KeeblerAssociate Professor, Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University, Daytona Beach, FL, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lack of verification is often cited as a root cause of medication errors; however, medication errors occur in spite of conventional verification practices and it appears that human factors engineering (HFE) can inform the design of a more effective method. To this end, an HFE-driven process was designed and implemented in an urban, Midwestern emergency medical service agency. Medication error data were collected over a 54-month period, 27 months before and after implementation. A decrease in the average monthly error rate was realized for all medications administered (49.0%) during the post-intervention time period. The average monthly error rate for fentanyl, a commonly administered analgesic, demonstrated a 71.1% error rate decrease. This study is the first to evaluate the effectiveness of a team-based cross-check process for medication verification to prevent errors in the prehospital setting.

Indexed as

cross-checkemergency medical servicesmedication errorsverification

Identifiers

PMID30728945
PMCPMC6351968

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.