Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37964342›Full record

ArticleJournal of pharmaceutical policy and practice2023

Assessing the severity of medication administration errors identified in an observational study using a valid and reliable method.

Lindemberg Assunção-Costa, Charleston Ribeiro Pinto, Juliana Ferreira Fernandes Machado, Cleidenete Gomes Valli, Luis Eugenio Portela Fernandes de Souza

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of pharmaceutical policy and practice, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 17% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Observational
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

5 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Lindemberg Assunção-CostaDepartment of Medicine, School of Pharmacy, Federal University of Bahia and National Institute for Phamaceutical Assistence and Pharmacoeconomy - INAFF, Rua Barão de Jeremoabo, 147, 2º andar, Campus Ondina, Salvador, Bahia, 40170-115, Brazil. lindemberg.rn@gmail.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8752-7301
Charleston Ribeiro PintoDepartment of Medicine, School of Pharmacy, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Juliana Ferreira Fernandes MachadoNational Institute for Pharmaceutical Assistance and Pharmacoeconomics - INAFF, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Cleidenete Gomes ValliNational Institute for Pharmaceutical Assistance and Pharmacoeconomics - INAFF, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Luis Eugenio Portela Fernandes de SouzaInstitute of Collective Health, Federal University of Bahia, Salvador, Bahia, Brazil.
Universidade Federal da Bahia · BRNational Institute of Science and Technology · ID

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEpidemiological data on medication errors severity are scarce. The assessment of the prevalence and severity of medication errors may be limited because of several reasons, including a lack of standardization in the method of identifying medication administration errors and little knowledge about the appropriate assessment tools to measure severity. Thus, in this study, we aim to assess the potential severity of errors identified by direct observation in a teaching hospital.

methodsWe used a validated method for assessing the potential severity of medication administration errors. Responses are scored on a 10-point scale. The 203 errors identified in a previous study were organized per similarity, resulting in 67 errors. This list was assessed by a panel of a physician, a nurse, and two pharmacists. The average score for each of the 67 errors was estimated considering the scores given by the 4 judges. Errors with a severity index < 3, between 3 and 7, and > 7 were considered minor, moderate, and severe, respectively.

resultsProfessionals classified the potential clinical significance of the errors as minor, moderate, and severe in 8.8% (18/203), 82.8% (168/203), and 8.4% (17/203) of the cases, respectively. Most errors considered potentially serious (41%, 7/17) were technical errors. Most potentially serious errors involved insulin. Regarding the administration route, nine (53%) potentially serious errors involved medications administered intravenously.

conclusionsMost of the errors were considered as potentially moderated by the expert panel; however, the frequency of potentially serious errors was higher than that in previous studies using the same methodology, which highlights the need for strategies to reduce their occurrence.

Indexed as

HospitalMedication administration errorsMedication errorsObservationalPatient safetySeverity

Identifiers

PMID37964342
PMCPMC10648330
OpenAlexW4388656160

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.