Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences.

Schwappach, David L B; Pfeiffer, Yvonne; Taxis, Katja (2016). Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences. BMJ open, 6(6), e011394. BMJ Publishing Group 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011394

[img]
Preview
Text
Schwappach BMJOpen 2016.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution-Noncommercial (CC-BY-NC).

Download (1MB) | Preview

BACKGROUND

Double-checking is widely recommended as an essential method to prevent medication errors. However, prior research has shown that the concept of double-checking is not clearly defined, and that little is known about actual practice in oncology, for example, what kind of checking procedures are applied.

OBJECTIVE

To study the practice of different double-checking procedures in chemotherapy administration and to explore nurses' experiences, for example, how often they actually find errors using a certain procedure. General evaluations regarding double-checking, for example, frequency of interruptions during and caused by a check, or what is regarded as its essential feature was assessed.

METHODS

In a cross-sectional survey, qualified nurses working in oncology departments of 3 hospitals were asked to rate 5 different scenarios of double-checking procedures regarding dimensions such as frequency of use in practice and appropriateness to prevent medication errors; they were also asked general questions about double-checking.

RESULTS

Overall, 274 nurses (70% response rate) participated in the survey. The procedure of jointly double-checking (read-read back) was most commonly used (69% of respondents) and rated as very appropriate to prevent medication errors. Jointly checking medication was seen as the essential characteristic of double-checking-more frequently than 'carrying out checks independently' (54% vs 24%). Most nurses (78%) found the frequency of double-checking in their department appropriate. Being interrupted in one's own current activity for supporting a double-check was reported to occur frequently. Regression analysis revealed a strong preference towards checks that are currently implemented at the responders' workplace.

CONCLUSIONS

Double-checking is well regarded by oncology nurses as a procedure to help prevent errors, with jointly checking being used most frequently. Our results show that the notion of independent checking needs to be transferred more actively into clinical practice. The high frequency of reported interruptions during and caused by double-checks is of concern.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine (ISPM)
?? DCD5A442C604E17DE0405C82790C4DE2 ??

UniBE Contributor:

Schwappach, David

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services

ISSN:

2044-6055

Publisher:

BMJ Publishing Group

Language:

English

Submitter:

Doris Kopp Heim

Date Deposited:

21 Jun 2016 15:14

Last Modified:

06 Jul 2016 09:21

Publisher DOI:

10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011394

PubMed ID:

27297014

Uncontrolled Keywords:

ONCOLOGY patient safety

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.83904

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/83904

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback