PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 14666362

[Medication errors: who is responsible?].

Abstract

New diagnostic and therapeutic technologies are used with growing frequency, improving the quality of medical assistance and increasing life expectancy. Health care, however, is becoming progressively more expensive and complex. Adverse events related to medical assistance, particularly errors, are becoming public, being debated and judged in courts. Given their training, health workers are not prepared to deal with errors, which are associated with shame, fear and punishment. The approach to errors in the health system is usually individualistic, considering such events as acts of insecurity performed by careless, non-motivated and ill-trained persons. The tendency is to hide errors when they occur, with the result that an important learning opportunity is lost. There is another way to deal with errors, a systemic view that has obtained positive results in sectors such as aviation, anesthesiology and unit-dose drug distribution systems. These systems have varied degrees of safety and should take into account human limitations when designed and applied. A change in paradigm is needed when dealing with drugs, as it is not enough for a drug to have quality assurance, but the complete process of drug use should be safe. Medication errors, avoidable by definition, are at present a serious public health issue, leading to loss of lives and significant financial losses. A systemic approach to medication errors may disclose failures in the process as a whole, and improvements can be implemented to reduce their occurrence.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Mário Borges Rosa, Edson Perini. 2003-11-05. [Medication errors: who is responsible?].. https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-42302003000300041

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

Using enquiry in learning: from vision to reality in higher education.

This paper reports on the contribution of six nurse educators to embed enquiry-led learning in a pre-registration nursing programme. Their focus was to evaluate student and facilitator perspectives of a hybrid model of problem-based learning, a form of enquiry-based learning and to focus on facilitators' perceptions of its longer-term utility with large student groups. Problem-based learning is an established learning strategy in healthcare internationally; however, insufficient evidence of its effectiveness with large groups of pre-registration students exists. Fourth Generation Evaluation was used, applying the Nominal Group Technique and Focus Group interviews, for data collection. In total, four groups representing different branches of pre-registration students (n = 121) and 15 facilitators participated. Students identified seven strengths and six areas for development related to problem-based learning. Equally, analysis of facilitators' discussions revealed several themes related to strengths and challenges. The consensus was that using enquiry aided the development of independent learning and encouraged deeper exploration of nursing and allied subject material. However, problems and frustrations were identified in relation to large numbers of groups, group dynamics, room and library resources and personal development. The implications of these findings for longer-term utility with large student groups are discussed.

Attitude of Health Personnel↗