Multiple Points of System Failure Underpin Continuous Subcutaneous Infusion Safety Incidents in Palliative Care: A Mixed Methods Analysis

Overview

Journal Palliat Med

Publisher Sage Publications

Specialty Critical Care

Date 2024 Oct 24

PMID 39444150

Authors

Amy Brown

Sarah Yardley

Ben Bowers

Sally-Anne Francis

Lucy Bemand-Qureshi

Stuart Hellard

Antony Chuter

Andrew Carson-Stevens

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: About 25% of palliative medication incidents involve continuous subcutaneous infusions. Complex structural and human factor issues make these risk-prone interventions. Detailed analysis of how this safety-critical care can be improved has not been undertaken. Understanding context, contributory factors and events leading to incidents is essential.

Aims: (1) Understand continuous subcutaneous infusion safety incidents and their impact on patients and families; (2) Identify targets for system improvements by learning from recurrent events and contributory factors.

Design: Following systematic identification and stratification by degree of harm, a mixed methods analysis of palliative medication incidents involving continuous subcutaneous infusions comprising quantitative descriptive analysis using the atent fety (PISA) classification system and qualitative narrative analysis of free-text reports.

Setting/participants: Palliative medication incidents ( = 7506) reported to the National Reporting and Learning System, England and Wales (2016-2021).

Results: About 1317/7506 incidents involved continuous subcutaneous infusions with 943 (72%) detailing harms. Primary incidents (most proximal to patient outcomes) leading to inappropriate medication use (including not using medication when it was needed) were underpinned by breakdowns in three major medication processes: monitoring and supply (405, 31%), administration (383, 29%) and prescribing (268, 20%). Recurring contributory factors included discontinuity of care within and between settings, inadequate time, inadequate staffing and unfamiliarity with protocols. Psychological harms for patients and families were identified.

Conclusions: System infrastructure is needed to enable timely supply of medication and equipment, effective coordinated use of continuous subcutaneous infusions, communication and continuity of care. Training is needed to improve incident descriptions so these pinpoint precise targets for safer care.

References

Landrigan C, Parry G, Bones C, Hackbarth A, Goldmann D, Sharek P . Temporal trends in rates of patient harm resulting from medical care. N Engl J Med. 2010; 363(22):2124-34. DOI: 10.1056/NEJMsa1004404. View

Payne S, Turner M, Seamark D, Thomas C, Brearley S, Wang X . Managing end of life medications at home--accounts of bereaved family carers: a qualitative interview study. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2014; 5(2):181-8. DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2014-000658. View

Urquhart A, Yardley S, Thomas E, Donaldson L, Carson-Stevens A . Learning from patient safety incidents involving acutely sick adults in hospital assessment units in England and Wales: a mixed methods analysis for quality improvement. J R Soc Med. 2021; 114(12):563-574. PMC: 8722780. DOI: 10.1177/01410768211032589. View

Emmerton L, Rizk M . Look-alike and sound-alike medicines: risks and 'solutions'. Int J Clin Pharm. 2011; 34(1):4-8. DOI: 10.1007/s11096-011-9595-x. View

Mason B, Carduff E, Laidlaw S, Kendall M, Murray S, Finucane A . Integrating lived experiences of out-of-hours health services for people with palliative and end-of-life care needs with national datasets for people dying in Scotland in 2016: A mixed methods, multi-stage design. Palliat Med. 2022; 36(3):478-488. PMC: 8972951. DOI: 10.1177/02692163211066256. View

Williams H, Edwards A, Hibbert P, Rees P, Evans H, Panesar S . Harms from discharge to primary care: mixed methods analysis of incident reports. Br J Gen Pract. 2015; 65(641):e829-37. PMC: 4655737. DOI: 10.3399/bjgp15X687877. View

Thomas T, Barclay S . Continuous subcutaneous infusion in palliative care: a review of current practice. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2015; 21(2):60, 62-4. DOI: 10.12968/ijpn.2015.21.2.60. View

Coyle S, Sinden R, Wignall-Coyle J, Benson S, Powell P, Monnery D . Continuous subcutaneous infusion: is community anticipatory prescribing and administration safe?. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2021; 13(e3):e1373-e1378. DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2021-003259. View

Brennan N, Mattick K . A systematic review of educational interventions to change behaviour of prescribers in hospital settings, with a particular emphasis on new prescribers. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2012; 75(2):359-72. PMC: 3579251. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2012.04397.x. View

10.

Hultman T, Reder E, Dahlin C . Improving psychological and psychiatric aspects of palliative care: the national consensus project and the national quality forum preferred practices for palliative and hospice care. Omega (Westport). 2009; 57(4):323-39. DOI: 10.2190/OM.57.4.a. View

11.

Rees P, Edwards A, Powell C, Hibbert P, Williams H, Makeham M . Patient Safety Incidents Involving Sick Children in Primary Care in England and Wales: A Mixed Methods Analysis. PLoS Med. 2017; 14(1):e1002217. PMC: 5240916. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1002217. View

12.

Williams H, Donaldson S, Noble S, Hibbert P, Watson R, Kenkre J . Quality improvement priorities for safer out-of-hours palliative care: Lessons from a mixed-methods analysis of a national incident-reporting database. Palliat Med. 2018; 33(3):346-356. PMC: 6376594. DOI: 10.1177/0269216318817692. View

13.

Vogler S, Fischer S . How to address medicines shortages: Findings from a cross-sectional study of 24 countries. Health Policy. 2020; 124(12):1287-1296. PMC: 7505130. DOI: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2020.09.001. View

14.

Mitten T . Subcutaneous drug infusions: a review of problems and solutions. Int J Palliat Nurs. 2002; 7(2):75-85. DOI: 10.12968/ijpn.2001.7.2.8918. View

15.

Etkind S, Bone A, Gomes B, Lovell N, Evans C, Higginson I . How many people will need palliative care in 2040? Past trends, future projections and implications for services. BMC Med. 2017; 15(1):102. PMC: 5436458. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-017-0860-2. View

16.

Dinnen T, Williams H, Yardley S, Noble S, Edwards A, Hibbert P . Patient safety incidents in advance care planning for serious illness: a mixed-methods analysis. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019; . PMC: 9380496. DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2019-001824. View

17.

Rees P, Edwards A, Panesar S, Powell C, Carter B, Williams H . Safety incidents in the primary care office setting. Pediatrics. 2015; 135(6):1027-35. DOI: 10.1542/peds.2014-3259. View

18.

Bowers B, Ryan R, Hoare S, Pollock K, Barclay S . Anticipatory syringe drivers: a step too far. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019; 9(2):149-150. PMC: 6582724. DOI: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001728. View

19.

Lewis P, Dornan T, Taylor D, Tully M, Wass V, Ashcroft D . Prevalence, incidence and nature of prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: a systematic review. Drug Saf. 2009; 32(5):379-89. DOI: 10.2165/00002018-200932050-00002. View

20.

Yardley S, Williams H, Bowie P, Edwards A, Noble S, Donaldson L . Which human factors design issues are influencing system performance in out-of-hours community palliative care? Integration of realist approaches with an established systems analysis framework to develop mid-range programme theory. BMJ Open. 2022; 12(1):e048045. PMC: 8724735. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-048045. View