Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study

Background: Intravenous (IV) medication administration has traditionally been regarded to be error-prone with high potential for harm. A recent US multisite study revealed surprisingly few potentially harmful errors despite a high overall error rate. However, there is limited evidence about infusion...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ann Blandford, Dominic Furniss, Galal H Galal-Edeen, Gill Chumbley, Li Wei, Astrid Mayer, Bryony Dean Franklin
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: NIHR Journals Library 2020-02-01
Series:Health Services and Delivery Research
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08070
id doaj-103bbdccf71f4d5b83e1a0d41595ee8c
record_format Article
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ann Blandford
Dominic Furniss
Galal H Galal-Edeen
Gill Chumbley
Li Wei
Astrid Mayer
Bryony Dean Franklin
spellingShingle Ann Blandford
Dominic Furniss
Galal H Galal-Edeen
Gill Chumbley
Li Wei
Astrid Mayer
Bryony Dean Franklin
Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
Health Services and Delivery Research
intravenous infusions
medication administration
england
hospitals
patient harm
risk
patient safety
resilience
mixed methods
observational study
qualitative study
medication errors
organisational standards
policy
practice
safety management
complexity science
complex adaptive system
ders
dose error reduction software
infusion devices
smart pumps
author_facet Ann Blandford
Dominic Furniss
Galal H Galal-Edeen
Gill Chumbley
Li Wei
Astrid Mayer
Bryony Dean Franklin
author_sort Ann Blandford
title Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
title_short Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
title_full Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
title_fullStr Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
title_full_unstemmed Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
title_sort intravenous infusion practices across england and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational study
publisher NIHR Journals Library
series Health Services and Delivery Research
issn 2050-4349
2050-4357
publishDate 2020-02-01
description Background: Intravenous (IV) medication administration has traditionally been regarded to be error-prone with high potential for harm. A recent US multisite study revealed surprisingly few potentially harmful errors despite a high overall error rate. However, there is limited evidence about infusion practices in England and how they relate to prevalence and types of error. Objectives: To determine the prevalence, types and severity of errors and discrepancies in infusion administration in English hospitals, and to explore sources of variation in errors, discrepancies and practices, including the contribution of smart pumps. Design: Phase 1 comprised an observational point-prevalence study of IV infusions, with debrief interviews and focus groups. Observers compared each infusion against the medication order and local policy. Deviations were classified as either errors or discrepancies based on their potential for patient harm. Contextual issues and reasons for deviations were explored qualitatively during observer debriefs, and analytically in supplementary analyses. Phase 2 comprised in-depth observational studies at five of the participating sites to better understand causes of error and how safety is maintained. Workshops were held with key stakeholder groups, including health professionals and policy-makers, the public and industry. Setting: Sixteen English NHS hospital trusts. Results: Point-prevalence data were collected from 1326 patients and 2008 infusions. In total, 240 errors were observed in 231 infusions and 1489 discrepancies were observed in 1065 infusions. Twenty-three errors (1.1% of all infusions) were considered potentially harmful; one might have resulted in short-term patient harm had it not been intercepted, but none was judged likely to prolong hospital stay or result in long-term harm. Types and prevalence of deviations varied widely among trusts, as did local policies. Deviations from medication orders and local policies were sometimes made for efficiency or to respond to patient need. Smart pumps, as currently implemented, had little effect. Staff had developed practices to manage efficiency and safety pragmatically by working around systemic challenges. Limitations: Local observers may have assessed errors differently across sites, although steps were taken to minimise differences through observer training, debriefs, and review and cleaning of data. Each in-depth study involved a single researcher, and these were limited in scale and scope. Conclusions: Errors and discrepancies are common in everyday infusion administration but most have low potential for patient harm. Findings are best understood by viewing IV infusion administration as a complex adaptive system. Better understanding of performance variability to strategically manage risk may be more helpful for improving patient safety than striving to eliminate all deviations. Future work: There is potential value in reviewing policy around IV infusion administration to reduce unnecessary variability, manage staff workload and engage patients, while retaining the principle that policy has to be fit for purpose, contextualised to the particular ward situation and treatment protocol, and sensitive to the risks of different medications. Further work on understanding infusion administration as a complex adaptive system might deliver new insights into managing patient safety. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.
topic intravenous infusions
medication administration
england
hospitals
patient harm
risk
patient safety
resilience
mixed methods
observational study
qualitative study
medication errors
organisational standards
policy
practice
safety management
complexity science
complex adaptive system
ders
dose error reduction software
infusion devices
smart pumps
url https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08070
work_keys_str_mv AT annblandford intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT dominicfurniss intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT galalhgalaledeen intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT gillchumbley intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT liwei intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT astridmayer intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
AT bryonydeanfranklin intravenousinfusionpracticesacrossenglandandtheirimpactonpatientsafetyamixedmethodsobservationalstudy
_version_ 1724497416878555136
spelling doaj-103bbdccf71f4d5b83e1a0d41595ee8c2020-11-25T03:48:44ZengNIHR Journals LibraryHealth Services and Delivery Research2050-43492050-43572020-02-018710.3310/hsdr0807012/209/27Intravenous infusion practices across England and their impact on patient safety: a mixed-methods observational studyAnn Blandford0Dominic Furniss1Galal H Galal-Edeen2Gill Chumbley3Li Wei4Astrid Mayer5Bryony Dean Franklin6UCL Interaction Centre, University College London, London, UKUCL Interaction Centre, University College London, London, UKUCL Interaction Centre, University College London, London, UKPain Management Centre, Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust, London, UKUCL Institute of Healthcare Engineering, University College London, London, UKUCL Institute of Healthcare Engineering, University College London, London, UKUCL Institute of Healthcare Engineering, University College London, London, UKBackground: Intravenous (IV) medication administration has traditionally been regarded to be error-prone with high potential for harm. A recent US multisite study revealed surprisingly few potentially harmful errors despite a high overall error rate. However, there is limited evidence about infusion practices in England and how they relate to prevalence and types of error. Objectives: To determine the prevalence, types and severity of errors and discrepancies in infusion administration in English hospitals, and to explore sources of variation in errors, discrepancies and practices, including the contribution of smart pumps. Design: Phase 1 comprised an observational point-prevalence study of IV infusions, with debrief interviews and focus groups. Observers compared each infusion against the medication order and local policy. Deviations were classified as either errors or discrepancies based on their potential for patient harm. Contextual issues and reasons for deviations were explored qualitatively during observer debriefs, and analytically in supplementary analyses. Phase 2 comprised in-depth observational studies at five of the participating sites to better understand causes of error and how safety is maintained. Workshops were held with key stakeholder groups, including health professionals and policy-makers, the public and industry. Setting: Sixteen English NHS hospital trusts. Results: Point-prevalence data were collected from 1326 patients and 2008 infusions. In total, 240 errors were observed in 231 infusions and 1489 discrepancies were observed in 1065 infusions. Twenty-three errors (1.1% of all infusions) were considered potentially harmful; one might have resulted in short-term patient harm had it not been intercepted, but none was judged likely to prolong hospital stay or result in long-term harm. Types and prevalence of deviations varied widely among trusts, as did local policies. Deviations from medication orders and local policies were sometimes made for efficiency or to respond to patient need. Smart pumps, as currently implemented, had little effect. Staff had developed practices to manage efficiency and safety pragmatically by working around systemic challenges. Limitations: Local observers may have assessed errors differently across sites, although steps were taken to minimise differences through observer training, debriefs, and review and cleaning of data. Each in-depth study involved a single researcher, and these were limited in scale and scope. Conclusions: Errors and discrepancies are common in everyday infusion administration but most have low potential for patient harm. Findings are best understood by viewing IV infusion administration as a complex adaptive system. Better understanding of performance variability to strategically manage risk may be more helpful for improving patient safety than striving to eliminate all deviations. Future work: There is potential value in reviewing policy around IV infusion administration to reduce unnecessary variability, manage staff workload and engage patients, while retaining the principle that policy has to be fit for purpose, contextualised to the particular ward situation and treatment protocol, and sensitive to the risks of different medications. Further work on understanding infusion administration as a complex adaptive system might deliver new insights into managing patient safety. Funding: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 7. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.https://doi.org/10.3310/hsdr08070intravenous infusionsmedication administrationenglandhospitalspatient harmriskpatient safetyresiliencemixed methodsobservational studyqualitative studymedication errorsorganisational standardspolicypracticesafety managementcomplexity sciencecomplex adaptive systemdersdose error reduction softwareinfusion devicessmart pumps