Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31037029›Full record

ArticleTherapeutics and clinical risk management2019

Interprofessional safety reporting and review of adverse events and medication errors in critical care.

Claire Chapuis, Sébastien Chanoine, Laurence Colombet, Silvia Calvino-Gunther, Caroline Tournegros, Nicolas Terzi, Pierrick Bedouch, Carole Schwebel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Therapeutics and clinical risk management, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. 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

8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Claire ChapuisPôle Pharmacie, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38000, France, cchapuis1@chu-grenoble.fr.
Sébastien ChanoinePôle Pharmacie, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38000, France, cchapuis1@chu-grenoble.fr.
Laurence ColombetCHU Grenoble Alpes, Réanimation Médicale Pôle Urgences Médecine Aiguë, Grenoble 38000, France.
Silvia Calvino-GuntherCHU Grenoble Alpes, Réanimation Médicale Pôle Urgences Médecine Aiguë, Grenoble 38000, France.
Caroline TournegrosCHU Grenoble Alpes, Réanimation Médicale Pôle Urgences Médecine Aiguë, Grenoble 38000, France.
Nicolas TerziUniversité Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38000, France.
Pierrick BedouchPôle Pharmacie, CHU Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38000, France, cchapuis1@chu-grenoble.fr.
Carole SchwebelUniversité Grenoble Alpes, Grenoble 38000, France.
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble · FRInserm · FRCentre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe intensive care unit (ICU) environment is prone to the risk of adverse events (AEs) and medication errors (MEs). The objective of this work was to describe a multidisciplinary safety program focused on AE and ME reporting and review in an ICU over a 7-year period.

methodsThe program was implemented in an 18-bed medical ICU of a 2,200-bed university hospital. A multidisciplinary steering committee (intensivist, clinical pharmacist, nurses, and research assistants) met monthly. The first part of the meeting was dedicated to the review of events targeted through an internal voluntary reporting system, and the second part concerned the analysis of the previous month's events, according to a standardized method called Orion, inspired by the aeronautic industry.

resultsA total of 808 AEs were reported, mostly related to medication processes (30.3% and 33.4% for prescription and administration, respectively). Among these, 526 AEs were related to medications (65.1%), of which 464 were MEs (88.2%). These MEs concerned mostly anti-infective drugs (23.5%) and related to wrong doses (35.8%). Among all AEs reported, 58 (43 MEs [74.1%]) were analyzed further and found to be associated with anti-infective (16.1%) and vasoactive drugs (16.1%). According to National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention classification, most AEs caused no harm to patients (category A-D: 38 events, 65.5%). Nurses were most often involved in the analysis (50.7%), along with pharmacists (37.5%). Training was identified as the most frequent corrective action (45.1%).

conclusionThis program dedicated to AE and ME reporting, review, and analysis in ICU showed long-term engagement of the health care team in AE surveillance and helped in targeting measures for education, organization, and promoting teamwork and safety.

Indexed as

adverse eventinterprofessionalmedication errorreportingreviewsafety

Identifiers

PMID31037029
PMCPMC6450184
OpenAlexW2934650249

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.