» Articles » PMID: 20421552

Association of Interruptions with an Increased Risk and Severity of Medication Administration Errors

Overview
Journal Arch Intern Med
Specialty General Medicine
Date 2010 Apr 28
PMID 20421552
Citations 152
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Background: Interruptions have been implicated as a cause of clinical errors, yet, to our knowledge, no empirical studies of this relationship exist. We tested the hypothesis that interruptions during medication administration increase errors.

Methods: We performed an observational study of nurses preparing and administering medications in 6 wards at 2 major teaching hospitals in Sydney, Australia. Procedural failures and interruptions were recorded during direct observation. Clinical errors were identified by comparing observational data with patients' medication charts. A volunteer sample of 98 nurses (representing a participation rate of 82%) were observed preparing and administering 4271 medications to 720 patients over 505 hours from September 2006 through March 2008. Associations between procedural failures (10 indicators; eg, aseptic technique) and clinical errors (12 indicators; eg, wrong dose) and interruptions, and between interruptions and potential severity of failures and errors, were the main outcome measures.

Results: Each interruption was associated with a 12.1% increase in procedural failures and a 12.7% increase in clinical errors. The association between interruptions and clinical errors was independent of hospital and nurse characteristics. Interruptions occurred in 53.1% of administrations (95% confidence interval [CI], 51.6%-54.6%). Of total drug administrations, 74.4% (n = 3177) had at least 1 procedural failure (95% CI, 73.1%-75.7%). Administrations with no interruptions (n = 2005) had a procedural failure rate of 69.6% (n = 1395; 95% CI, 67.6%-71.6%), which increased to 84.6% (n = 148; 95% CI, 79.2%-89.9%) with 3 interruptions. Overall, 25.0% (n = 1067; 95% CI, 23.7%-26.3%) of administrations had at least 1 clinical error. Those with no interruptions had a rate of 25.3% (n = 507; 95% CI, 23.4%-27.2%), whereas those with 3 interruptions had a rate of 38.9% (n = 68; 95% CI, 31.6%-46.1%). Nurse experience provided no protection against making a clinical error and was associated with higher procedural failure rates. Error severity increased with interruption frequency. Without interruption, the estimated risk of a major error was 2.3%; with 4 interruptions this risk doubled to 4.7% (95% CI, 2.9%-7.4%; P < .001).

Conclusion: Among nurses at 2 hospitals, the occurrence and frequency of interruptions were significantly associated with the incidence of procedural failures and clinical errors.

Citing Articles

Errors Associated With Medication Administration by a Nurse During Hospitalisation: A Prospective Observational Multicentric Study.

Tesar O, Dosedel M, Kubena A, Mala-Ladova K, Prokesova R, Brabcova I Nurs Open. 2025; 12(1):e70139.

PMID: 39793977 PMC: 11723783. DOI: 10.1002/nop2.70139.


Secure Messaging Use and Wrong-Patient Ordering Errors Among Inpatient Clinicians.

Lou S, Lew D, Xia L, Baratta L, Eiden E, Kannampallil T JAMA Netw Open. 2024; 7(12):e2447797.

PMID: 39630450 PMC: 11618466. DOI: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.47797.


Investigating pediatric nurses' perceptions of factors contributing to MAEs at Yendi hospital, Ghana.

Nukpezah R, Anyaba N, Osman W BMC Pediatr. 2024; 24(1):792.

PMID: 39627723 PMC: 11613571. DOI: 10.1186/s12887-024-05269-x.


The mediating role of sleep quality between pre-sleep portable media device use and nursing performance.

Salimi Pormehr P, Saremi M, Khodakarim S, Rahmani H Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):26963.

PMID: 39505914 PMC: 11541998. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-76315-y.


Iterative Development of a Clinical Decision Support Tool to Enhance Naloxone Coprescribing.

Wu R, Foster E, Zhang Q, Eynatian T, Mishuris R, Mishuris R Appl Clin Inform. 2024; 16(1):215-222.

PMID: 39454643 PMC: 11882316. DOI: 10.1055/a-2447-8463.