Hedlund Nancy, Beer Idal, Hoppe-Tichy Torsten, Trbovich Patricia
Baxter Healthcare Corporation, Global Health Economics and Outcomes Research, Deerfield, Illinois, USA.
Medical Affairs, Baxter Healthcare Corporation, Deerfield, Illinois, USA.
BMJ Open. 2017 Dec 28;7(12):e015912. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-015912.
To examine published evidence on intravenous admixture preparation errors (IAPEs) in healthcare settings.
Searches were conducted in three electronic databases (January 2005 to April 2017). Publications reporting rates of IAPEs and error types were reviewed and categorised into the following groups: component errors, dose/calculation errors, aseptic technique errors and composite errors. The methodological rigour of each study was assessed using the Hawker method.
Of the 34 articles that met inclusion criteria, 28 reported the site of IAPEs: central pharmacies (n=8), nursing wards (n=14), both settings (n=4) and other sites (n=3). Using the Hawker criteria, 14% of the articles were of good quality, 74% were of fair quality and 12% were of poor quality. Error types and reported rates varied substantially, including wrong drug (~0% to 4.7%), wrong diluent solution (0% to 49.0%), wrong label (0% to 99.0%), wrong dose (0% to 32.6%), wrong concentration (0.3% to 88.6%), wrong diluent volume (0.06% to 49.0%) and inadequate aseptic technique (0% to 92.7%)%). Four studies directly compared incidence by preparation site and/or method, finding error incidence to be lower for doses prepared within a central pharmacy versus the nursing ward and lower for automated preparation versus manual preparation. Although eight studies (24%) reported ≥1 errors with the potential to cause patient harm, no study directly linked IAPE occurrences to specific adverse patient outcomes.
The available data suggest a need to continue to optimise the intravenous preparation process, focus on improving preparation workflow, design and implement preventive strategies, train staff on optimal admixture protocols and implement standardisation. Future research should focus on the development of consistent error subtype definitions, standardised reporting methodology and reliable, reproducible methods to track and link risk factors with the burden of harm associated with these errors.
研究医疗机构中已发表的关于静脉药物混合配制错误(IAPEs)的证据。
在三个电子数据库中进行检索(2005年1月至2017年4月)。对报告IAPEs发生率和错误类型的出版物进行审查,并分类为以下几组:成分错误、剂量/计算错误、无菌技术错误和复合错误。使用霍克方法评估每项研究的方法严谨性。
在符合纳入标准的34篇文章中,28篇报告了IAPEs发生的地点:中心药房(n = 8)、护理病房(n = 14)、两个地点均有(n = 4)以及其他地点(n = 3)。根据霍克标准,14%的文章质量良好,74%质量一般,12%质量较差。错误类型和报告的发生率差异很大,包括错误药物(约0%至4.7%)、错误稀释液(0%至49.0%)、错误标签(0%至99.0%)、错误剂量(0%至32.6%)、错误浓度(0.3%至88.6%)、错误稀释液体积(0.06%至49.0%)和无菌技术不足(0%至92.7%)。四项研究直接比较了不同配制地点和/或方法的发生率,发现中心药房配制的剂量与护理病房相比错误发生率较低,自动配制与手工配制相比错误发生率较低。尽管八项研究(24%)报告了≥1起可能导致患者伤害的错误,但没有研究直接将IAPE的发生与特定的不良患者结局联系起来。
现有数据表明需要继续优化静脉药物配制过程,专注于改进配制工作流程,设计并实施预防策略,对工作人员进行最佳混合方案培训并实现标准化。未来的研究应侧重于制定一致的错误子类型定义、标准化报告方法以及可靠、可重复的方法来跟踪风险因素并将其与这些错误相关的伤害负担联系起来。