Study on distribution characteristics and countermeasures of approximate errors in intravenous drug allocation in 4530 cases

doi:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1 769.2020.09.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective To analyze the incidence and distribution characteristics of approximate errors in intravenous drug allocation so as to provide references to improve management mechanism and ensure safe infusion.Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted in 4 530 cases of approximate errors with registration data from January 2017 to December 2018 in a Pharmacy Intravenous Admixture Service of the hospital. According to 4 dimensions including the time of occurrence,drug type,the population of occurrence and the population of discovery,this study classifies,summarizes the characteristics and discusses the countermeasures.Results There were a total of 4 530 cases of approximate errors occurring in the stage of allocation,with the error rate of 1.26‰. According to the time of occurrence,2 752 cases（60.8%） occurred before allocation and 1 778 cases （39.2%） were in the process of allocation. According to the type of drugs,1 756 cases（98.76%） of errors happened on common drugs and 16 cases（0.9%） were total parenteral nutrition,and 6 cases（0.34%） were anti-neoplastic agents during the allocation process. According to the incidence of personnel,3 183 cases（70.26%） were pharmacists;1 168 cases（25.78%） were allocation nurses. According to the population of discovery,3 133 cases（69.16%） were allocation nurses;1 397 cases（30.84%） were pharmacists.Conclusion Intravenous drug allocation has been checked through multiple procedures in Pharmacy Intravenous Admixture Service,but there is still a certain incidence of approximate errors,and it is necessary to further optimize the management mechanism,improve the awareness and skills of safe delivery,and ensure the quality of intravenous infusion.

Key words: Intravenous Drug Allocation, Medication Errors, Total Parenteral Nutrition, Antineoplastic Agents, Safety Management, Nursing Administration Research

摘要：

目的分析静脉药物配置环节近似错误的发生率及分布特点,为完善管理机制,确保输液安全提供依据。方法回顾性分析2017年1月—2018年12月该院静脉药物配置中心4530例近似错误登记资料,按发生时间、药物种类、发生人群及发现人群4个维度进行分类和分析,并探讨对策。结果配置环节共发生近似错误4530例,错误发生率为1.26‰。按发生时间分类：配置前2752例（60.8%）、配置过程中1778例（39.2%）;按药物种类分类：配置过程中普通药物1756例（98.76%）、全胃肠外营养16例（0.9%）、抗肿瘤药6例（0.34%）;按发生人员分类：排药药师3183例（70.26%）、配置护士1168例（25.78%）;按发现人员分类：配置护士3133例（69.16%）、成品复核药师1 397例（30.84%）。结论静脉药物经静脉药物配置中心配置,经过多重环节核对,但近似错误仍有一定的发生率,需优化管理机制,提高安全意识,确保成品输液安全。

关键词: 静脉药物配置, 给药错误, 全胃肠外营养, 抗肿瘤药, 安全管理, 护理管理研究

PAN Huili,LU Bin,YANG Yan,SONG Ping,XU Hong,LI Yan,WANG Hongmei. Study on distribution characteristics and countermeasures of approximate errors in intravenous drug allocation in 4530 cases[J]. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 2020, 55(9): 1310-1314.

潘慧丽,卢彬,杨燕,宋萍,徐虹,李艳,王红妹. 4 530例静脉药物配置近似错误的分布特点与对策研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2020, 55(9): 1310-1314.

Figures/Tables 5

References 17

[1]	Maricle K, Whitehead L, Rhodes M. Examining medication errors in a tertiary hospital[J]. J Nurs Care Qual, 2007,22(1):20-27. DOI URL PMID
[2]	谭然, 曾宪涛, 曹英娟, 等. 用药错误预防及管理临床实践指南的质量评价与内容分析[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(6):867-873.
[3]	何展旺, 赖飚. 静脉用药调配中心医院感染分析及控制策略[J]. 中华实验和临床感染病杂志(电子版), 2016,10(2):208-212.
[4]	陈宁, 王婷, 马莉. 345例用药错误原因分析及对策[J]. 中国药物警戒, 2015,12(2):106-109.
[5]	合理用药国际网络中国中心组临床安全用药组, 中国药理学会药源性疾病学专业委员会, 中国药学会医院药学专业委员会, 等. 医疗机构给药环节用药错误防范指导原则[J]. 药物不良反应杂志, 2016,18(1):4-7.
[6]	Zwicker D, Fulmer T. Reducing adverse drug events in older adults. In:evidence-based geriatric nursing protocols for best practice[M]. 4th ed. New York: Springer Publishing Company, 2012: 324-362.
[7]	National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Controlled drugs：safe use and management（NG46）[EB/OL]. （2016-04-12）[2018-08-24]. https://www. nice. org. uk/guidance/ng46.
[8]	张文娴, 崔妙玲, 应燕萍. 构建医院护理差错及不良事件报告系统的研究进展[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2008,43(12):1142-1144.
[9]	秦春香, 丁四清, 潘辰, 等. 护理不良事件发生后护士的反应及不愿上报的原因分析[J]. 中国现代医学杂志, 2013,23(17):90-94.
[10]	Henneman EA. Unreported errors in the intensive care unit:a case study of the way we work[J]. Crit Care Nurse, 2007,27(5):27-34. URL PMID
[11]	Westbrook JI, Li L, Lehnbom EC, et al. What are incident reports telling us? A comparative study at two Australian hospitals of medication errors identified at audit,detected by staff and reported to an incident system[J]. Int J Qual Heal Care, 2015,27(1):1-9.
[12]	NPSA. Organisation patient safety incident reports. 2015[EB/OL]. [2018-12-19]. http://www. nrls. npsa. nhs. ukpatient-safety-data/organisation-patient-safety-incident-reports/.
[13]	吕永利, 王培红, 李沙沙, 等. 护理管理者对护理不良事件中第二受害者态度的质性研究[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(8):1210-1214.
[14]	张潭月, 何彩娣. 门诊输液室信息管理软件的设计与应用[J]. 护理与康复, 2016,15(5):468-471.
[15]	丁四清, 陆晶, 秦春香, 等. 数据挖掘在护理不良事件管理中的应用进展[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2019,54(6):873-877.
[16]	黄静, 吴婉英, 江子芳, 等. 基于闭环管理构建用药安全管理系统的研究[J]. 中国护理管理, 2018,18(8):1103-1107.
[17]	Times NY. The age of big data[EB/OL]. (2012-10-02)[2018-12-26]. http://www. nytimes. com/2012/02/12/Sunday-review/bigdatas-impact-in-the-world. html?pagewanted=all.