ArticleInternational journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care2021
Effect of automated unit dose dispensing with barcode scanning on medication administration errors: an uncontrolled before-and-after study.
Article in International journal for quality in health care : journal of the International Society for Quality in Health Care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed.
- Digital Health Technologies and Standardized Protocols for Patient Safety in Hospital-Based Settings: A Scoping Review.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2026Review
- Impact of barcode medication administration on patient safety in UK hospital settings: protocol for a mixed-methods realist evaluation.BMJ open · 2025Article
- Implementation of Medication-Related Technology and Its Impact on Pharmacy Workflow: Real-World Evidence Usability Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2025Article
- Introducing Unit Dose Dispensing in a University Hospital - Effects on Medication Safety and Dispensing Time.Risk management and healthcare policy · 2025Article
- Automated dispensing cabinets and their impact on the rate of omitted and delayed doses: A systematic review.Exploratory research in clinical and social pharmacy · 2024Article
- Automated Drugs Dispensing Systems in Hospitals: a Health Technology Assessment (HTA) Study Across Six European Countries.ClinicoEconomics and outcomes research : CEOR · 2024Article
- Article
- Implementation of barcode medication administration (BMCA) technology on infusion pumps in the operating rooms.BMJ open quality · 2023Article
- The Impact of Hospital Pharmacy Operation on the Quality of Patient Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023Article
- Prevalence and determinants of medication administration errors in clinical wards: A two-centre prospective observational study.Journal of clinical nursing · 2023Observational
- Health technology assessment of an automated unit-dose drug distribution system in a high-specialization national referral hospital of the Italian National Health Service.Global & regional health technology assessmentArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMedication administration errors (MAEs) occur frequently in hospitals and may compromise patient safety. Preventive strategies are needed to reduce the risk of MAEs.
objectiveThe primary aim of this study was to assess the effect of central automated unit dose dispensing with barcode-assisted medication administration on the prevalence of MAEs. Secondary aims were to assess the effect on the type and potential severity of MAEs. Furthermore, compliance with procedures regarding scanning of patient and medication barcodes and nursing staff satisfaction with the medication administration system were assessed.
methodsWe performed a prospective uncontrolled before-and-after study in six clinical wards in a Dutch university hospital from 2018 to 2020. MAE data were collected by observation. The primary outcome was the proportion of medication administrations with one or more MAEs. Secondary outcomes were the type and potential severity of MAEs, rates of compliance with patient identification and signing of administered medication by scanning and nursing staff satisfaction with the medication administration system. Multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression analyses were used for the primary outcome to adjust for confounding and for clustering on nurse and patient level.
resultsOne or more MAEs occurred in 291 of 1490 administrations (19.5%) pre-intervention and in 258 of 1630 administrations (15.8%) post-intervention (adjusted odds ratio 0.70, 95% confidence interval 0.51-0.96). The rate of omission fell from 4.6% to 2.0% and of wrong dose from 3.8% to 2.1%, whereas rates of other MAE types were similar. The rate of potentially harmful MAEs fell from 3.0% (n = 44) to 0.3% (n = 5). The rates of compliance with scanning of patient and medication barcode post-intervention were 13.6% and 55.9%, respectively.The median overall satisfaction score of the nurses with the medication administration system on a 100-point scale was 70 (interquartile range 63-75, n = 193) pre-intervention and 70 (interquartile range 60-78, n = 145) post-intervention (P = 0.626, Mann-Whitney U test).
conclusionThe implementation of central automated unit dose dispensing with barcode-assisted medication administration was associated with a lower probability of MAEs, including potentially harmful errors, but more compliance with scanning procedures is needed. Nurses were moderately satisfied with the medication administration system, both before and after implementation. In conclusion, despite low compliance with scanning procedures, this study shows that this intervention contributes to the improvement of medication safety in hospitals.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.