× You are not currently logged in. To receive all the benefits our site has to offer, we encourage you to log in now.

Medication Errors Observed in 36 Healthcare Facilities

Originally Published:
2002
Key Point Summary
Key Point Summary Author(s):
Ranjani Varadarajan
Share
Key Concepts/Context

The authors in this study aimed to measure and compare the medication error rates at 36 healthcare facilities in Georgia and Colorado. Three different facility types were randomly stratified and included in the study; Joint Commission accredited hospitals, Joint Commission non-accredited hospitals and skilled nursing facilities. The main aim was to observe if the medication error rates in these healthcare settings differ by facility type (by bed size) or by State.

Objectives

To identify and measure the prevalence of medication errors in 3 different healthcare facility types and sizes: Accredited, non-accredited, skilled nursing facilities.

Methods

The data was collected using observation method; wherein the observer shadowed the nurses in the study setting, during their administration rounds. The observed data was later reconciled with the physician’s orders; and any discrepancy in what was administered versus ordered was classified as an error. An expert panel of physicians further determined the clinical significance of each of the identified errors.

Design Implications
This study highlights the incidence of medication error rates in different types and sizes of healthcare facilities. Although the authors did not find any significant differences in error rates w.r.t the type or size of the facility, the study highlighted the discrepancy in the error rates among facilities in different states and highlighted the association of the Joint Commission accreditation of the healthcare facilities and the impact on error rates.
Findings

The study found an overall error rate of 19% for all the study settings (n= 605/ 3216). The most frequent errors were wrong time (43%), omission (30%), wrong dose (17%), and unauthorized drug (4%). The expert panel of physicians judged about 7% of the errors to be clinically significant; i.e., errors with potential for harm, also known as adverse drug events. The authors found no significant differences in the error rates among the three types of healthcare facilities (P = .82) or by facility size (P = .39). But they did observe that error rates were significantly higher for facilities in Colorado compared to those in Georgia

Limitations

The authors indicated the following limitations of the study:

1) Potential observer effect on the observed; 2) Sampling inadequacies, as facilities from only two states were selected for the study, hence might not be generalizable to other states; 3) Convenience sampling of the doses observed, hence might not be representative of the doses administered at the facilities; 4) Errors that the observer might have made during the observation process.

Setting
Hospitals|Residential healthcare facilities
Outcome Category
Error related outcomes|Patient / resident health outcomes
Key Point Summary Author(s):
Ranjani Varadarajan
Primary Author
Barker, K. N.