SynthesisInternational nursing review2026
Nurses' Adherence to Double-Checking: A Systematic Review of Influencing Factors, Improvement Strategies, and Their Effectiveness.
Synthesis in International nursing review, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Barriers and Facilitators for Medication Safety in Emergency Care Using a SEIPS Model: A Qualitative Study.Journal of nursing management · 2026Article
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
aimThis systematic review aims to systematically (1) synthesize factors of nurses' adherence to double-checking, (2) identify and describe strategies used to improve adherence, and (3) assess the reported effectiveness of these strategies.
introductionMedication administration errors are a major cause of adverse events. While two-nurse double-checking is widely mandated, nurses' adherence is inconsistent and often not performed independently or is omitted when clinical demands compete. Existing reviews have not fully synthesized adherence determinants and improvement approaches across the work system. METHODOLOGY: Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched the CINAHL, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to November 17, 2024. Peer-reviewed studies examining adherence determinants and evaluating adherence-improvement strategies were included. Determinants were mapped to a human factors engineering paradigm, and strategy findings were synthesized narratively.
resultsFactors affecting adherence included interruptions, unavailability of a second nurse, high workload or time pressure, low perceived risk or necessity of double-checking, and crowded medication rooms. Strategies used included written or visual reminders, education with feedback, and barcode-supported auditing systems. Studies also reported that education paired with visual reminders and co-sign tools, ongoing feedback with workflow integration, and protocolized barcode-supported auditing improved adherence; however, evaluations were limited and inconsistent.
conclusionsNon-adherence largely reflects constraints at all levels of the work system. Therefore, feasible and sustainable independent double-checking requires the redesign of tasks, workflows, physical space and environments, resource allocation, and enabling mechanisms. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE: Practical support should enable independent cognitive verification, timely access to a second checker, and safe communication during verification. Policies should define independent double-checking, target requirements to higher-risk situations, and pair mandates with staffing, workflow design, and usable technology that make adherence to double-checking feasible and reviewable.
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.