The ‘'Wrong Drug” Problem in Anaesthesia: An Analysis of 2000 Incident Reports

Author:

Currie M.1,Mackay P.12,Morgan C.13,Runciman W. B.14,Russell W. J.14,Sellen A.15,Webb R. K.14,Williamson J. A.14

Affiliation:

1. Department of Anaesthesia & Intensive Care, Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, N.S.W.

2. Department of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Vic.

3. Department of Anaesthesia, The Royal Victorian Eye and Ear Hospital, East Melbourne, Vic.

4. Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Adelaide and Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide, S.A.

5. Applied Psychology Unit and Rank Xerox Cambridge EuroPARC, Cambridge, England

Abstract

Amongst the first 2000 incidents reported to the Australian Incident Monitoring Study, there were 144 incidents in which the “wrong drug” was nearly or actually administered to a patient. Thirty-three percent of the incidents involved ampoules and just over 40% syringes; in over half of the latter the syringes were of the same size, and also, in over half, they were correctly labelled. In 81% of the 144 incidents the “wrong drug” was actually given. This was more common with syringes (93%) than ampoules (58%). Thus the most common error was actually giving the wrong drug from a correctly labelled syringe. The most common drug involved was a muscle relaxant in both ampoule and syringe incidents. In 74% of all reports, there was the potential for serious harm to the patient; however no deaths were reported. Factors which contributed significantly to the incidents were similar appearance, inattention and haste. “Failure of communication” was a significant factor in syringe incidents when two or more staff were involved. The only significant factor which minimised the outcome was rechecking of the syringe or drug ampoule before giving the drug. Strategies suggested to address the “wrong drug” problem include education of staff about the nature of the problem and the mechanisms involved; colour coding of selected drug classes for both ampoules and syringes; the use of standardised drug storage, layout and selection protocols; having a drawing up and labelling convention; and the use of checking protocols.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3