Projects per year
Abstract
Background: User-testing and subsequent modification of clinical guidelines increases health professionals’ information retrieval and comprehension. No study has investigated whether this results in safer care.
Objective: To compare the frequency of medication errors when administering an intravenous medicine using the current NHS Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG) versus an IMG version revised with user-testing.
Method: Single-blind, randomised parallel group in-situ simulation. Participants were on-duty nurses/midwives who regularly prepared intravenous medicines. Using a training manikin in their clinical area, participants administered a voriconazole infusion, a high-risk medicine requiring several steps to prepare. They were randomised to use current IMG guidelines or IMG guidelines revised with user-testing. Direct observation was used to time the simulation and identify errors. Participant confidence was measured using a validated instrument. The primary outcome was the percentage of simulations with at least one moderate-severe IMG-related error, with error severity classified by an expert panel.
Results: In total, 133 participants were randomised to current guidelines and 140 to user-tested guidelines. Fewer moderate-severe IMG-related errors occurred with the user-tested guidelines (n=68, 49%) compared with current guidelines (n=79, 59%), but this difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.02). Significantly more simulations were completed without any IMG-related errors with the user-tested guidelines (n=67, 48%) compared with current guidelines (n=26, 20%) (risk ratio: 2.46; 95% confidence interval: 1.68-3.60). Median simulation completion time was 1.6 minutes (95% confidence interval 0.2-3.0) less with the user-tested guidelines. Participants who used user-tested guidelines reported greater confidence.
Conclusion: User-testing injectable medicines guidelines reduces the number of errors and the time taken to prepare and administer intravenous medicines, whilst increasing staff confidence.
Objective: To compare the frequency of medication errors when administering an intravenous medicine using the current NHS Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG) versus an IMG version revised with user-testing.
Method: Single-blind, randomised parallel group in-situ simulation. Participants were on-duty nurses/midwives who regularly prepared intravenous medicines. Using a training manikin in their clinical area, participants administered a voriconazole infusion, a high-risk medicine requiring several steps to prepare. They were randomised to use current IMG guidelines or IMG guidelines revised with user-testing. Direct observation was used to time the simulation and identify errors. Participant confidence was measured using a validated instrument. The primary outcome was the percentage of simulations with at least one moderate-severe IMG-related error, with error severity classified by an expert panel.
Results: In total, 133 participants were randomised to current guidelines and 140 to user-tested guidelines. Fewer moderate-severe IMG-related errors occurred with the user-tested guidelines (n=68, 49%) compared with current guidelines (n=79, 59%), but this difference was not statistically significant (risk ratio: 0.82; 95% confidence interval: 0.66-1.02). Significantly more simulations were completed without any IMG-related errors with the user-tested guidelines (n=67, 48%) compared with current guidelines (n=26, 20%) (risk ratio: 2.46; 95% confidence interval: 1.68-3.60). Median simulation completion time was 1.6 minutes (95% confidence interval 0.2-3.0) less with the user-tested guidelines. Participants who used user-tested guidelines reported greater confidence.
Conclusion: User-testing injectable medicines guidelines reduces the number of errors and the time taken to prepare and administer intravenous medicines, whilst increasing staff confidence.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 17-26 |
Number of pages | 10 |
Journal | BMJ Quality and Safety |
Volume | 30 |
Issue number | 1 |
Early online date | 30 Jun 2020 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - 11 Dec 2020 |
Keywords
- administration, intravenous
- drug information
- guidelines
- medication errors
- nurses
- patient safety
- practice guidelines
- user-testing
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'User-testing guidelines to improve the safety of intravenous medicines administration: a randomised in-situ simulation study'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Projects
- 1 Finished
-
Can Systematic User Testing of the National NHS Injectable Medicines Guide Improve Patient Safety
Jones, M. (PI)
National Institute for Health Research
1/01/18 → 31/12/19
Project: Central government, health and local authorities
Profiles
-
Matthew Jones
Person: Research & Teaching
-
Anita McGrogan
- Department of Life Sciences - Senior Lecturer
- EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Statistical Applied Mathematics (SAMBa)
- Centre for Therapeutic Innovation
Person: Research & Teaching
Datasets
-
Dataset for "User-testing guidelines to improve the safety of intravenous medicines administration: a randomised in-situ simulation study"
Jones, M. (Creator), McGrogan, A. (Creator), Raynor, D. K. (Creator), Watson, M. (Creator) & Franklin, B. D. (Creator), University of Bath, 3 Jun 2020
DOI: 10.15125/BATH-00751
Dataset