PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 11067442

Improving medication administration error reporting systems. Why do errors occur?

Abstract

Monitoring medication administration errors (MAE) is often included as part of the hospital's risk management program. While observation of actual medication administration is the most accurate way to identify errors, hospitals typically rely on voluntary incident reporting processes. Although incident reporting systems are more economical than other methods of error detection, incident reporting can also be a time-consuming process depending on the complexity or "user-friendliness" of the reporting system. Accurate incident reporting systems are also dependent on the ability of the practitioner to: 1) recognize an error has actually occurred; 2) believe the error is significant enough to warrant reporting; and 3) overcome the embarrassment of having committed a MAE and the fear of punishment for reporting a mistake (either one's own or another's mistake).

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

B J Wakefield, D S Wakefield, T Uden-Holman. 2000. Improving medication administration error reporting systems. Why do errors occur?. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11067442/

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Using trade names: a risk factor for accidental drug overdose.

Medication errors due to the exclusive use of trade names of drugs may lead to life-threatening complications. We report the case of a patient with verapamil overdose as a result of this. This case illustrates that the use of trade names, omitting the international nonproprietary names of the active moiety, carries the risk of serious adverse drug events by overdose.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗

Timing of new black box warnings and withdrawals for prescription medications.

CONTEXT: Recently approved drugs may be more likely to have unrecognized adverse drug reactions (ADRs) than established drugs, but no recent studies have examined how frequently postmarketing surveillance identifies important ADRs. OBJECTIVE: To determine the frequency and timing of discovery of new ADRs described in black box warnings or necessitating withdrawal of the drug from the market. DESIGN AND SETTING: Examination of the Physicians' Desk Reference for all new chemical entities approved by the US Food and Drug Administration between 1975 and 1999, and all drugs withdrawn from the market between 1975 and 2000 (with or without a prior black box warning). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of and time to a new black box warning or drug withdrawal. RESULTS: A total of 548 new chemical entities were approved in 1975-1999; 56 (10.2%) acquired a new black box warning or were withdrawn. Forty-five drugs (8.2%) acquired 1 or more black box warnings and 16 (2.9%) were withdrawn from the market. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, the estimated probability of acquiring a new black box warning or being withdrawn from the market over 25 years was 20%. Eighty-one major changes to drug labeling in the Physicians' Desk Reference occurred including the addition of 1 or more black box warnings per drug, or drug withdrawal. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, half of these changes occurred within 7 years of drug introduction; half of the withdrawals occurred within 2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Serious ADRs commonly emerge after Food and Drug Administration approval. The safety of new agents cannot be known with certainty until a drug has been on the market for many years.

Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems↗