PubMed · 10157943
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
1996. Medication error tracking program cuts risk, impresses Joint Commission.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10157943/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a national concern. OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence of medication errors (doses administered differently than ordered). DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Hospitals accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, nonaccredited hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities in Georgia and Colorado. PARTICIPANTS: A stratified random sample of 36 institutions. Twenty-six declined, with random replacement. Medication doses given (or omitted) during at least 1 medication pass during a 1- to 4-day period by nurses on high medication-volume nursing units. The target sample was 50 day-shift doses per nursing unit or until all doses for that medication pass were administered. METHODS: Medication errors were witnessed by observation, and verified by a research pharmacist (E.A.F.). Clinical significance was judged by an expert panel of physicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Medication errors reaching patients. RESULTS: In the 36 institutions, 19% of the doses (605/3216) were in error. The most frequent errors by category were wrong time (43%), omission (30%), wrong dose (17%), and unauthorized drug (4%). Seven percent of the errors were judged potential adverse drug events. There was no significant difference between error rates in the 3 settings (P =.82) or by size (P =.39). Error rates were higher in Colorado than in Georgia (P =.04) CONCLUSIONS: Medication errors were common (nearly 1 of every 5 doses in the typical hospital and skilled nursing facility). The percentage of errors rated potentially harmful was 7%, or more than 40 per day in a typical 300-patient facility. The problem of defective medication administration systems, although varied, is widespread.
The ISO 9001 quality assurance of the National Institute of Oncology has been achieved successfully. We give an account of the brief history and the structure of the assurance system of the Institute, the process of setting our goals, and also the experience gained from drafting ISO 9001 handbook and flowcharts. Apart from the bureaucratic nature of quality assurance, it is a good opportunity for us to investigate our everyday work, put it into orderly manner and work more reliably. Experience has shown that the introduction of a quality assurance system increases the level of patient care, the documentation helps the Institute or some of its departments, or even individuals prevent law suits, and serves as a sound basis for proposing promotion, salary increases and bonuses, or even honors.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.