Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisorErstad, Brianen
dc.contributor.authorHennings, Steven
dc.date.accessioned2017-06-05T18:09:57Z
dc.date.available2017-06-05T18:09:57Z
dc.date.issued2009
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10150/623911
dc.descriptionClass of 2009 Abstracten
dc.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: To compare possible differences in the proportion of serious potential ADEs associated with high-risk medications that were avoided by the use of AID technology in adult and pediatric ICU patients and to investigate the proportion of serious ADEs associated with high-risk medications as identified by root cause analyses (RCA) that occurred before and after AID implementation. METHODS: Study Site: This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary care, academic medical center in Tucson Arizona. Design: This was a two-part retrospective study involving data obtained from an AID database and root-cause analyses. Information on high-risk medications obtained from the AID database was used to compare the proportion of serious ADEs avoided by the use of AID technology in adult and pediatric patients. Information on high-risk medications (administered by continuous infusion) obtained from root-cause analyses was used to compare the proportion of serious ADEs that occurred during the 5-year period before and the 5-year period after AID implementation. RESULTS: A total of 261 infusions (225 in the adult and 36 in the pediatric) generated an alert where the final outcome resulted in a reprogramming event when the limit was exceeded by 2.5 times or greater. The pediatric population was 1.68 time (95% CI=1.18 to 2.38) more likely to require a reprogramming event than the adult acute care population for all high-risk medications combined. Significantly more reprogramming events occurred in the pediatric patients with potassium (RR=2.77, 95 CI=1.15 to 6.68) and insulin (RR=2.73, 95% CI=1.15 to 6.45) infusions. Overrides accounted for 80% of the total reprogramming and override events when the maximum limit was exceeded by 10 times or more. There were significantly more overrides in the pediatric compared to the adult population for the high-risk medications (RR=1.82, 95% CI=1.32 to 2.53), however, there were significantly fewer overrides in the pediatric versus adult patients on fentanyl (RR=0.34, 95% CI=0.17 to 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: We found that medication errors involving high-risk medications with the potential to cause ADEs can occur frequently during the administration phase of drug delivery. While smart AIDs cannot intercept all errors, it did show that it was able to intercept certain errors, especially key=pad entry errors. We also determined that when an alert was generated involving our high-risk medications, clinicians were more apt to reprogram the AID when the alert occurred in our pediatric population. While smart pumps have shown great improvement and allow for safer drug delivery, more research is needed in this area before the ability of these smart AIDs to improve drug administration safety can be shown.
dc.language.isoen_USen
dc.publisherThe University of Arizona.en
dc.rightsCopyright © is held by the author.en
dc.subjectAdverse Drug Eventsen
dc.subjectInfusion Technologyen
dc.subjectHigh-Risk Medicationsen
dc.subject.meshDrug-Related Side Effects and Adverse Reactionsen
dc.subject.meshMedication Errorsen
dc.titlePreventable Adverse Drug Events Avoided with the Implementation of “Smart” Infusion Technologyen_US
dc.typetexten
dc.typeElectronic Reporten
dc.contributor.departmentCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Arizonaen
dc.description.collectioninformationThis item is part of the Pharmacy Student Research Projects collection, made available by the College of Pharmacy and the University Libraries at the University of Arizona. For more information about items in this collection, please contact Jennifer Martin, Associate Librarian and Clinical Instructor, Pharmacy Practice and Science, jenmartin@email.arizona.edu.en
html.description.abstractOBJECTIVES: To compare possible differences in the proportion of serious potential ADEs associated with high-risk medications that were avoided by the use of AID technology in adult and pediatric ICU patients and to investigate the proportion of serious ADEs associated with high-risk medications as identified by root cause analyses (RCA) that occurred before and after AID implementation. METHODS: Study Site: This retrospective study was conducted at a tertiary care, academic medical center in Tucson Arizona. Design: This was a two-part retrospective study involving data obtained from an AID database and root-cause analyses. Information on high-risk medications obtained from the AID database was used to compare the proportion of serious ADEs avoided by the use of AID technology in adult and pediatric patients. Information on high-risk medications (administered by continuous infusion) obtained from root-cause analyses was used to compare the proportion of serious ADEs that occurred during the 5-year period before and the 5-year period after AID implementation. RESULTS: A total of 261 infusions (225 in the adult and 36 in the pediatric) generated an alert where the final outcome resulted in a reprogramming event when the limit was exceeded by 2.5 times or greater. The pediatric population was 1.68 time (95% CI=1.18 to 2.38) more likely to require a reprogramming event than the adult acute care population for all high-risk medications combined. Significantly more reprogramming events occurred in the pediatric patients with potassium (RR=2.77, 95 CI=1.15 to 6.68) and insulin (RR=2.73, 95% CI=1.15 to 6.45) infusions. Overrides accounted for 80% of the total reprogramming and override events when the maximum limit was exceeded by 10 times or more. There were significantly more overrides in the pediatric compared to the adult population for the high-risk medications (RR=1.82, 95% CI=1.32 to 2.53), however, there were significantly fewer overrides in the pediatric versus adult patients on fentanyl (RR=0.34, 95% CI=0.17 to 0.70). CONCLUSIONS: We found that medication errors involving high-risk medications with the potential to cause ADEs can occur frequently during the administration phase of drug delivery. While smart AIDs cannot intercept all errors, it did show that it was able to intercept certain errors, especially key=pad entry errors. We also determined that when an alert was generated involving our high-risk medications, clinicians were more apt to reprogram the AID when the alert occurred in our pediatric population. While smart pumps have shown great improvement and allow for safer drug delivery, more research is needed in this area before the ability of these smart AIDs to improve drug administration safety can be shown.


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record