Design of a safer approach to intravenous drug infusions: failure mode effects analysis

Objectives: A set of standard processes was developed for delivering continuous drug infusions in order to improve (1) patient safety; (2) efficiency in staff workflow; (3) hemodynamic stability during infusion changes, and (4) efficient use of resources. Failure modes effects analysis (FMEA) was used to examine the impact of process changes on the reliability of delivering drug infusions. Setting: An 11 bed multidisciplinary pediatric ICU in the children’s hospital of an academic medical center staffed by board certified pediatric intensivists. The hospital uses computerized physician order entry for all medication orders. Methods: A multidisciplinary team characterized key elements of the drug infusion process. The process was enhanced to increase overall reliability and the original and revised processes were compared using FMEA. Resource consumption was estimated by reviewing purchasing and pharmacy records for the calendar year after full implementation of the revised process. Staff satisfaction was evaluated using an anonymous questionnaire administered to staff nurses in the ICU and pediatric residents who had rotated through the ICU. Results: The original process was characterized by six elements: selecting the drug; selecting a dose; selecting an infusion rate; calculating and ordering the infusion; preparing the infusion; programming the infusion pump and delivering the infusion. The following practice changes were introduced: standardizing formulations for all infusions; developing database driven calculators; extending infusion hang times from 24 to 72 hours; changing from bedside preparation by nurses to pharmacy prepared or premanufactured solutions. FMEA showed that the last three elements of the original process had high risk priority numbers (RPNs) of >225 whereas the revised process had no elements with RPNs >100. The combined effect of prolonging infusion hang times, preparation in the pharmacy, and purchasing premanufactured solutions resulted in 1500 fewer infusions prepared by nurses per year. Nursing staff expressed a significant preference and pediatric residents unanimously expressed a strong preference for the revised process. Conclusions: Standardization of infusion delivery reduced the frequency for completing the most unreliable elements of the process and reduced the riskiness of the individual elements. Both contribute to a safer system.

[1]  D. Bates,et al.  Prioritizing strategies for preventing medication errors and adverse drug events in pediatric inpatients. , 2003, Pediatrics.

[2]  Chen Yong-fei An Introduction To FMEA , 2002 .

[3]  D W Bates,et al.  Frequency, consequences and prevention of adverse drug events. , 1999, Journal of quality in clinical practice.

[4]  S D Small,et al.  Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events. Implications for prevention. ADE Prevention Study Group. , 1995, JAMA.

[5]  K. K. Lai Safety of prolonging peripheral cannula and i.v. tubing use from 72 hours to 96 hours. , 1998, American journal of infection control.

[6]  TonseN. K. Raju,et al.  MEDICATION ERRORS IN NEONATAL AND PAEDIATRIC INTENSIVE-CARE UNITS , 1989, The Lancet.

[7]  R. Bindler,et al.  Medication calculation ability of registered nurses. , 1991, Image--the journal of nursing scholarship.

[8]  C. Patterson,et al.  Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. , 1995 .

[9]  N. Laird,et al.  Incidence of Adverse Drug Events and Potential Adverse Drug Events: Implications for Prevention , 1995 .

[10]  J. McCulloch,et al.  CHAPTER 7 – Implications for Prevention , 1972 .

[11]  P. Perlstein,et al.  Errors in drug computations during newborn intensive care. , 1979, American journal of diseases of children.

[12]  D. Maki,et al.  Prospective study of replacing administration sets for intravenous therapy at 48- vs 72-hour intervals. 72 hours is safe and cost-effective. , 1987, JAMA.

[13]  D S Stein,et al.  Factors related to errors in medication prescribing. , 1997, JAMA.

[14]  An introduction to FMEA. Using failure mode and effects analysis to meet JCAHO's proactive risk assessment requirement. Failure Modes and Effect Analysis. , 2002, Health devices.

[15]  T Bayne,et al.  Effectiveness of medication calculation enhancement methods with nurses. , 1997, Journal of nursing staff development : JNSD.

[16]  M. Potts,et al.  Deficiencies in calculation and applied mathematics skills in pediatrics among primary care interns. , 1996, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[17]  G. Koren,et al.  Pediatric Medication Errors: Predicting and Preventing Tenfold Disasters , 1994, Journal of clinical pharmacology.

[18]  A. Allen,et al.  Drug errors and incidents in a neonatal intensive care unit. A quality assurance activity. , 1989, American journal of diseases of children.

[19]  N. Laird,et al.  Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events , 1995 .

[20]  N J Harper,et al.  Ability of hospital doctors to calculate drug doses , 1995, BMJ.

[21]  Matthew Grissinger,et al.  JCAHO: meeting the standards for patient safety. Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. , 2002, Journal of the American Pharmaceutical Association.

[22]  T S Lesar,et al.  Errors in the use of medication dosage equations. , 1998, Archives of pediatrics & adolescent medicine.

[23]  J. Burgmeier,et al.  Failure mode and effect analysis: an application in reducing risk in blood transfusion. , 2002, The Joint Commission journal on quality improvement.

[24]  Balbir S. Dhillon Failure Modes and Effect Analysis , 1999 .

[25]  David W Bates,et al.  Medication errors observed in 36 health care facilities. , 2002, Archives of internal medicine.

[26]  D. Bates,et al.  Preventable adverse drug events in hospitalized patients: a comparative study of intensive care and general care units. , 1997, Critical care medicine.