[Author Name(s), First M. Last, Omit Titles and Degrees]
[Institutional Affiliation(s)]
Problem
Double-checking is a typical method intended to improve patient safety and security. It is almost perceived in all areas and units inside the healthcare facilities. It is significant to double-check the medication before administering it to the patients predominantly in the emergency departments ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a20siv3jpg7","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":311,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"itemData":{"id":311,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines?","container-title":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing","page":"246","volume":"6","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Chua","given":"Gek Phin"},{"family":"Lee","given":"Kim Hua"},{"family":"Peralta","given":"Gemma Diente"},{"family":"Lim","given":"John Heng Chi"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019). Incapacitating the barriers need administrations to review medicine procedure strategies and involve nurses more in medicine security research and in planning medical guidelines for their practice ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a19172f2mol","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(dos Santos, Ulbrich, Woloszyn, & Vieira, 2018)","plainCitation":"(dos Santos, Ulbrich, Woloszyn, & Vieira, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":324,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/9Z7BC29J"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/9Z7BC29J"],"itemData":{"id":324,"type":"article-journal","title":"DDC-outlier: preventing medication errors using unsupervised learning","container-title":"IEEE journal of biomedical and health informatics","page":"874-881","volume":"23","issue":"2","author":[{"family":"Santos","given":"Henrique DP","non-dropping-particle":"dos"},{"family":"Ulbrich","given":"Ana Helena DPS"},{"family":"Woloszyn","given":"Vinícius"},{"family":"Vieira","given":"Renata"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (dos Santos, Ulbrich, Woloszyn, & Vieira, 2018). However, the significance of the double-check policies and any errors exposed during the double-check procedure must also be castoff for learning, education, awareness and organization development would be addressed in the research.
Review of Literature
Double examination of medicine administration in hospices is normally standard exercise, predominantly for high-risk medications. However, its efficacy in decreasing medication administration errors (MAEs) and enhancing patient consequences rests unclear (Koyama et al., 2019). A systematic review using five databases PubMed, CINAHIL, Ovid@Journals, was conducted to evaluate the evidence of the efficacy of double-checking to decrease MAEs ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"aki3i4c0m1","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Koyama, Maddox, Li, Bucknall, & Westbrook, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Koyama, Maddox, Li, Bucknall, & Westbrook, 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":301,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GTZXHYZE"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GTZXHYZE"],"itemData":{"id":301,"type":"article-journal","title":"Effectiveness of double checking to reduce medication administration errors: a systematic review","container-title":"BMJ Quality & Safety","page":"bmjqs-2019-009552","abstract":"Background Double checking medication administration in hospitals is often standard practice, particularly for high-risk drugs, yet its effectiveness in reducing medication administration errors (MAEs) and improving patient outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating evidence of the effectiveness of double checking to reduce MAEs.Methods Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid@Journals, OpenGrey) were searched for studies evaluating the use and effectiveness of double checking on reducing medication administration errors in a hospital setting. Included studies were required to report any of three outcome measures: an effect estimate such as a risk ratio or risk difference representing the association between double checking and MAEs, or between double checking and patient harm; or a rate representing adherence to the hospital’s double checking policy.Results Thirteen studies were identified, including 10 studies using an observational study design, two randomised controlled trials and one randomised trial in a simulated setting. Studies included both paediatric and adult inpatient populations and varied considerably in quality. Among three good quality studies, only one showed a significant association between double checking and a reduction in MAEs, another showed no association, and the third study reported only adherence rates. No studies investigated changes in medication-related harm associated with double checking. Reported double checking adherence rates ranged from 52% to 97% of administrations. Only three studies reported if and how independent and primed double checking were differentiated.Conclusion There is insufficient evidence that double versus single checking of medication administration is associated with lower rates of MAEs or reduced harm. Most comparative studies fail to define or investigate the level of adherence to independent double checking, further limiting conclusions regarding effectiveness in error prevention. Higher-quality studies are needed to determine if, and in what context (eg, drug type, setting), double checking produces sufficient benefits in patient safety to warrant the considerable resources required.CRD42018103436.","DOI":"10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009552","journalAbbreviation":"BMJ Qual Saf","author":[{"family":"Koyama","given":"Alain K"},{"family":"Maddox","given":"Claire-Sophie Sheridan"},{"family":"Li","given":"Ling"},{"family":"Bucknall","given":"Tracey"},{"family":"Westbrook","given":"Johanna I"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",8,7]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Koyama, Maddox, Li, Bucknall, & Westbrook, 2019). The research has evaluated the problems associated with the risk difference represented by the connection of double-checking and MAEs, the association of double-checking and patient harm and a percentage adherence to the hospital's twofold checking procedure ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2635gkbplr","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Koyama et al., 2019)","plainCitation":"(Koyama et al., 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":301,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GTZXHYZE"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GTZXHYZE"],"itemData":{"id":301,"type":"article-journal","title":"Effectiveness of double checking to reduce medication administration errors: a systematic review","container-title":"BMJ Quality & Safety","page":"bmjqs-2019-009552","abstract":"Background Double checking medication administration in hospitals is often standard practice, particularly for high-risk drugs, yet its effectiveness in reducing medication administration errors (MAEs) and improving patient outcomes remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review of studies evaluating evidence of the effectiveness of double checking to reduce MAEs.Methods Five databases (PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Ovid@Journals, OpenGrey) were searched for studies evaluating the use and effectiveness of double checking on reducing medication administration errors in a hospital setting. Included studies were required to report any of three outcome measures: an effect estimate such as a risk ratio or risk difference representing the association between double checking and MAEs, or between double checking and patient harm; or a rate representing adherence to the hospital’s double checking policy.Results Thirteen studies were identified, including 10 studies using an observational study design, two randomised controlled trials and one randomised trial in a simulated setting. Studies included both paediatric and adult inpatient populations and varied considerably in quality. Among three good quality studies, only one showed a significant association between double checking and a reduction in MAEs, another showed no association, and the third study reported only adherence rates. No studies investigated changes in medication-related harm associated with double checking. Reported double checking adherence rates ranged from 52% to 97% of administrations. Only three studies reported if and how independent and primed double checking were differentiated.Conclusion There is insufficient evidence that double versus single checking of medication administration is associated with lower rates of MAEs or reduced harm. Most comparative studies fail to define or investigate the level of adherence to independent double checking, further limiting conclusions regarding effectiveness in error prevention. Higher-quality studies are needed to determine if, and in what context (eg, drug type, setting), double checking produces sufficient benefits in patient safety to warrant the considerable resources required.CRD42018103436.","DOI":"10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009552","journalAbbreviation":"BMJ Qual Saf","author":[{"family":"Koyama","given":"Alain K"},{"family":"Maddox","given":"Claire-Sophie Sheridan"},{"family":"Li","given":"Ling"},{"family":"Bucknall","given":"Tracey"},{"family":"Westbrook","given":"Johanna I"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019",8,7]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Koyama et al., 2019). Thirteen studies were observed, including ten observational studies, one randomized control trial and last was a randomized trial (Koyama et al., 2019). Out of these studies it has been observed that one of three represented a significantly positive association of double-checking of administration of medicines with a reduced number of medication administration errors (Koyama et al., 2019). The study has shown an insignificant effect of double-checking in the reduction of medically administered errors overall (Koyama et al., 2019). Higher-quality reviews are required to conclude if, and in what setting, double-checking yields adequate remunerations in patient well-being to permit the substantial resources required.
Another study delivered suggestion that single checking arrangement is a feasible way to plummeting medication mistakes and also deliberate the additional benefit of staff gratification. Pledging quality and security contains the necessity to encounter the status quo grounded on exposed evidence ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1bscmb32hv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":311,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"itemData":{"id":311,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines?","container-title":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing","page":"246","volume":"6","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Chua","given":"Gek Phin"},{"family":"Lee","given":"Kim Hua"},{"family":"Peralta","given":"Gemma Diente"},{"family":"Lim","given":"John Heng Chi"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Chua, Lee, Peralta, & Lim, 2019). This study was conducted by Chua and the colleagues in 2019 to present an organized assessment procedure that delivers indication that the single-checking (SC) organization is not only a practical decision in decreasing medication mistakes but likewise has the additional improvement in the management. The study was performed via a survey and study survey comprised of 12 questions with a 5-point Likert rule. It has resulted in the number of medication errors essentially reduced (P < 0.001; a two-sample test of proportions). The nurses and the staff responded positively when introduced with changes regarding double checking process in the hospitals (Chua et al., 2019). The single checking procedures resulted in better delivery of quality care to the patients, staff self-satisfaction, and minimum time for waiting for patients and utilization of the available resources effectively (Chua et al., 2019). The study has suggested that single checking is a practical decision, and discerning double-checking may be merely for those RNs who are unacquainted with the procedure or medicines ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2npijgqgnn","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Chua et al., 2019)","plainCitation":"(Chua et al., 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":311,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"itemData":{"id":311,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines?","container-title":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing","page":"246","volume":"6","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Chua","given":"Gek Phin"},{"family":"Lee","given":"Kim Hua"},{"family":"Peralta","given":"Gemma Diente"},{"family":"Lim","given":"John Heng Chi"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Chua et al., 2019). The double examination must only be functional deliberately to circumstances that utmost warrant their consumption.
To evaluate the exercise of diverse double-checking measures in chemotherapy administration and to discover nurses' understandings, for instance, how frequently they essentially discover errors by a certain process. There are a lot of studies that have suggested a negative influence of double-checking before administering medication; however, few studies have shown a significant decline in the administration of medication errors. This cross-sectional survey was conducted by the researchers for universal assessments concerning double-checking, the incidence of disruptions through and produced by check, or what is observed as its vital feature was evaluated. It was essential to observe the oncology unit double-checking procedures to observe the types of procedures applied in it. It was a cross-sectional study in which 274 nurses were the participants ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1m68spvbgk","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach, Pfeiffer, & Taxis, 2016)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach, Pfeiffer, & Taxis, 2016)"},"citationItems":[{"id":308,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/TLFJZB3Z"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/TLFJZB3Z"],"itemData":{"id":308,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences","container-title":"BMJ open","page":"e011394","volume":"6","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"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.\nOBJECTIVE: 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.\nMETHODS: 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.\nRESULTS: 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.\nCONCLUSIONS: 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.","DOI":"10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011394","ISSN":"2044-6055","note":"PMID: 27297014\nPMCID: PMC4916573","shortTitle":"Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice","journalAbbreviation":"BMJ Open","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]],"season":"13"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach, Pfeiffer, & Taxis, 2016). The research was conducted utilizing the survey method and read back was most frequently rated to avoid medication mistakes. The survey evaluated that the nurses practising the double-checking procedures found it 78% appropriate process to effectively reduce the administration medication errors. Double-checking process was interrupted and it was the most frequently observed answer. It has been concluded that the double-checking was the most observed characteristics of oncology nurses and jointly observed was also most often observed among these nurses ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"kkI2BLx1","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2016)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2016)"},"citationItems":[{"id":308,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/TLFJZB3Z"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/TLFJZB3Z"],"itemData":{"id":308,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses' experiences","container-title":"BMJ open","page":"e011394","volume":"6","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"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.\nOBJECTIVE: 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.\nMETHODS: 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.\nRESULTS: 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.\nCONCLUSIONS: 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.","DOI":"10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011394","ISSN":"2044-6055","note":"PMID: 27297014\nPMCID: PMC4916573","shortTitle":"Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice","journalAbbreviation":"BMJ Open","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2016"]],"season":"13"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach et al., 2016). The most subsequently observed answer that the double-checking was interjected is a measure of concern that entails further research to be appraised.
Checking medicines before their administration by nurses is a fundamental anticipatory action for medication mistakes (Athanasakis, 2019). The research was conducted by Athanasakis and the colleagues to get evidence of the reviews concerning the method of checking medications before administration in the year 2019 ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1aq4t68kh3","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Athanasakis, 2019)","plainCitation":"(Athanasakis, 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":310,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/WL3UAEXH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/WL3UAEXH"],"itemData":{"id":310,"type":"article-journal","title":"A meta‐synthesis of how registered nurses make sense of their lived experiences of medication errors","container-title":"Journal of clinical nursing","author":[{"family":"Athanasakis","given":"Efstratios"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Athanasakis, 2019). In everyday clinical practice, because nurses accomplish medication checking in the routine medical practice. They practice it on their own (Single) or through another nurse (double) and are accountable for whatever they direct to the patients; the examination is openly connected to nursing. A literature examination was commenced from PubMed, Science-Direct, and British nursing index and Cinahil databases by particular keywords for appropriate articles available in English from January 1990 to March 2015. Twenty main study reviews and three assessments were incorporated for this study. The reviews taken were in support of the argument that states single checking, and double-checking before administering medication errors can significantly reduce the number of errors in hospitals. Single checking is being adapted in a few hospitals and has observed a decrease in medication errors. Various studies have also suggested that double-check can significantly decline the rate of administration of medication errors. It is very crucial for the nurses to single check and has double-checked, particularly when administering medication to the patients of critical care units and highly critical care units. However, the scarcity and ambiguous status of the data available has limited the review to generalize the results universally. This review has identified a research gap between limited data and research which has strongly recommended that there is a need for further research to evaluate the exact areas where and how these checking procedures are helpful.
There was a disparity among pediatric nurses' observance to double-checking stages through medication management. The greatest recurrent kind of administration mistakes or aberration commencing policy intricate the drug being delivered to the mothers to direct to the youngster while the healthcare provider was not present ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2ebfv79kul","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alsulami, Choonara, & Conroy, 2014)","plainCitation":"(Alsulami, Choonara, & Conroy, 2014)"},"citationItems":[{"id":304,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"itemData":{"id":304,"type":"article-journal","title":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital: an observational study","container-title":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","page":"1404-1413","volume":"70","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"AIM: To evaluate how closely double-checking policies are followed by nurses in paediatric areas and also to identify the types, frequency and rates of medication administration errors that occur despite the double-checking process.\nBACKGROUND: Double-checking by two nurses is an intervention used in many UK hospitals to prevent or reduce medication administration errors. There is, however, insufficient evidence to either support or refute the practice of double-checking in terms of medication error risk reduction.\nDESIGN: Prospective observational study.\nMETHODS: This was a prospective observational study of paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process for medication administration from April-July 2012.\nRESULTS: Drug dose administration events (n = 2000) were observed. Independent drug dose calculation, rate of administering intravenous bolus drugs and labelling of flush syringes were the steps with lowest adherence rates. Drug dose calculation was only double-checked independently in 591 (30%) drug administrations. There was a statistically significant difference in nurses' adherence rate to the double-checking steps between weekdays and weekends in nine of the 15 evaluated steps. Medication administration errors (n = 191) or deviations from policy were observed, at a rate of 9·6% of drug administrations. These included 64 drug doses, which were left for parents to administer without nurse observation.\nCONCLUSION: There was variation between paediatric nurses' adherence to double-checking steps during medication administration. The most frequent type of administration errors or deviation from policy involved the medicine being given to the parents to administer to the child when the nurse was not present.","DOI":"10.1111/jan.12303","ISSN":"1365-2648","note":"PMID: 24224731","shortTitle":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital","journalAbbreviation":"J Adv Nurs","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Alsulami","given":"Zayed"},{"family":"Choonara","given":"Imti"},{"family":"Conroy","given":"Sharon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",6]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alsulami, Choonara, & Conroy, 2014). The greatest number of errors were reported in the surveys which was related to the medication administration by parents. It was prospective observational research in which the drug doses, administration of drugs, double-checking policies and drug administration in the pediatric unit ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a15fgbkm5f6","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Rosenfeld et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Rosenfeld et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":322,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/SDI85X3F"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/SDI85X3F"],"itemData":{"id":322,"type":"article-journal","title":"Interdisciplinary medication decision making by pharmacists in pediatric hospital settings: An ethnographic study","container-title":"Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy","page":"269-278","volume":"14","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Rosenfeld","given":"Ellie"},{"family":"Kinney","given":"Sharon"},{"family":"Weiner","given":"Carlye"},{"family":"Newall","given":"Fiona"},{"family":"Williams","given":"Allison"},{"family":"Cranswick","given":"Noel"},{"family":"Wong","given":"Ian"},{"family":"Borrott","given":"Narelle"},{"family":"Manias","given":"Elizabeth"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rosenfeld et al., 2018). The pediatric nurses usually observe single checking and double-checking in case of critical care practice during their services delivered to the children; however, the parents often fail to administer medicine as per prescribed dose ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2c47ughugf","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)","plainCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)"},"citationItems":[{"id":304,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"itemData":{"id":304,"type":"article-journal","title":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital: an observational study","container-title":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","page":"1404-1413","volume":"70","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"AIM: To evaluate how closely double-checking policies are followed by nurses in paediatric areas and also to identify the types, frequency and rates of medication administration errors that occur despite the double-checking process.\nBACKGROUND: Double-checking by two nurses is an intervention used in many UK hospitals to prevent or reduce medication administration errors. There is, however, insufficient evidence to either support or refute the practice of double-checking in terms of medication error risk reduction.\nDESIGN: Prospective observational study.\nMETHODS: This was a prospective observational study of paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process for medication administration from April-July 2012.\nRESULTS: Drug dose administration events (n = 2000) were observed. Independent drug dose calculation, rate of administering intravenous bolus drugs and labelling of flush syringes were the steps with lowest adherence rates. Drug dose calculation was only double-checked independently in 591 (30%) drug administrations. There was a statistically significant difference in nurses' adherence rate to the double-checking steps between weekdays and weekends in nine of the 15 evaluated steps. Medication administration errors (n = 191) or deviations from policy were observed, at a rate of 9·6% of drug administrations. These included 64 drug doses, which were left for parents to administer without nurse observation.\nCONCLUSION: There was variation between paediatric nurses' adherence to double-checking steps during medication administration. The most frequent type of administration errors or deviation from policy involved the medicine being given to the parents to administer to the child when the nurse was not present.","DOI":"10.1111/jan.12303","ISSN":"1365-2648","note":"PMID: 24224731","shortTitle":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital","journalAbbreviation":"J Adv Nurs","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Alsulami","given":"Zayed"},{"family":"Choonara","given":"Imti"},{"family":"Conroy","given":"Sharon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",6]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alsulami et al., 2014). There were 64 medicines left for the parents to administer to their children and at that time, nurses were not present ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"2ZB6wV95","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)","plainCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)"},"citationItems":[{"id":304,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"itemData":{"id":304,"type":"article-journal","title":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital: an observational study","container-title":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","page":"1404-1413","volume":"70","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"AIM: To evaluate how closely double-checking policies are followed by nurses in paediatric areas and also to identify the types, frequency and rates of medication administration errors that occur despite the double-checking process.\nBACKGROUND: Double-checking by two nurses is an intervention used in many UK hospitals to prevent or reduce medication administration errors. There is, however, insufficient evidence to either support or refute the practice of double-checking in terms of medication error risk reduction.\nDESIGN: Prospective observational study.\nMETHODS: This was a prospective observational study of paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process for medication administration from April-July 2012.\nRESULTS: Drug dose administration events (n = 2000) were observed. Independent drug dose calculation, rate of administering intravenous bolus drugs and labelling of flush syringes were the steps with lowest adherence rates. Drug dose calculation was only double-checked independently in 591 (30%) drug administrations. There was a statistically significant difference in nurses' adherence rate to the double-checking steps between weekdays and weekends in nine of the 15 evaluated steps. Medication administration errors (n = 191) or deviations from policy were observed, at a rate of 9·6% of drug administrations. These included 64 drug doses, which were left for parents to administer without nurse observation.\nCONCLUSION: There was variation between paediatric nurses' adherence to double-checking steps during medication administration. The most frequent type of administration errors or deviation from policy involved the medicine being given to the parents to administer to the child when the nurse was not present.","DOI":"10.1111/jan.12303","ISSN":"1365-2648","note":"PMID: 24224731","shortTitle":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital","journalAbbreviation":"J Adv Nurs","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Alsulami","given":"Zayed"},{"family":"Choonara","given":"Imti"},{"family":"Conroy","given":"Sharon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",6]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alsulami et al., 2014). Drug prescription calculation was merely twofold verified autonomously in 591 (30%) medication administrations ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"QugYg71i","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)","plainCitation":"(Alsulami et al., 2014)"},"citationItems":[{"id":304,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/AX73MSMH"],"itemData":{"id":304,"type":"article-journal","title":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital: an observational study","container-title":"Journal of Advanced Nursing","page":"1404-1413","volume":"70","issue":"6","source":"PubMed","abstract":"AIM: To evaluate how closely double-checking policies are followed by nurses in paediatric areas and also to identify the types, frequency and rates of medication administration errors that occur despite the double-checking process.\nBACKGROUND: Double-checking by two nurses is an intervention used in many UK hospitals to prevent or reduce medication administration errors. There is, however, insufficient evidence to either support or refute the practice of double-checking in terms of medication error risk reduction.\nDESIGN: Prospective observational study.\nMETHODS: This was a prospective observational study of paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process for medication administration from April-July 2012.\nRESULTS: Drug dose administration events (n = 2000) were observed. Independent drug dose calculation, rate of administering intravenous bolus drugs and labelling of flush syringes were the steps with lowest adherence rates. Drug dose calculation was only double-checked independently in 591 (30%) drug administrations. There was a statistically significant difference in nurses' adherence rate to the double-checking steps between weekdays and weekends in nine of the 15 evaluated steps. Medication administration errors (n = 191) or deviations from policy were observed, at a rate of 9·6% of drug administrations. These included 64 drug doses, which were left for parents to administer without nurse observation.\nCONCLUSION: There was variation between paediatric nurses' adherence to double-checking steps during medication administration. The most frequent type of administration errors or deviation from policy involved the medicine being given to the parents to administer to the child when the nurse was not present.","DOI":"10.1111/jan.12303","ISSN":"1365-2648","note":"PMID: 24224731","shortTitle":"Paediatric nurses' adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children's hospital","journalAbbreviation":"J Adv Nurs","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Alsulami","given":"Zayed"},{"family":"Choonara","given":"Imti"},{"family":"Conroy","given":"Sharon"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2014",6]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alsulami et al., 2014). The study was conducted by the Alsulami and the colleagues in the year 2014, and the purpose of the research was to decline the rate of medication administration errors.
Oncology department has been observed with clear and specific strategies to maintain double-checking before administering medicines to the patients ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1h0finjjk4","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Rosenfeld et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Rosenfeld et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":322,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/SDI85X3F"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/SDI85X3F"],"itemData":{"id":322,"type":"article-journal","title":"Interdisciplinary medication decision making by pharmacists in pediatric hospital settings: An ethnographic study","container-title":"Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy","page":"269-278","volume":"14","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Rosenfeld","given":"Ellie"},{"family":"Kinney","given":"Sharon"},{"family":"Weiner","given":"Carlye"},{"family":"Newall","given":"Fiona"},{"family":"Williams","given":"Allison"},{"family":"Cranswick","given":"Noel"},{"family":"Wong","given":"Ian"},{"family":"Borrott","given":"Narelle"},{"family":"Manias","given":"Elizabeth"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rosenfeld et al., 2018). Nurses have been observed to follow the rules and policies while administering medication according to the hospital facility. Nurses observed with satisfying behaviour and efficiency was improved while administering medicine with a double-check. This study was conducted in the oncology department in the year 2018. The research has shown an enhanced self-medication administration in the department of oncology. Double-checking medicines is an extensively castoff policy to improve safe medication management in oncology; however, there is diminutive evidence to favour its efficacy. The increased usage of double-checking may be clarified by optimistic approaches to checking between nurses (Leahy et al., 2018). This was a survey conducted in three Swiss hospitals with a survey questionnaire (Fu et al., 2018). The survey included 41 objects with 6 areas ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1mlkl9p1kv","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach, Taxis, & Pfeiffer, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach, Taxis, & Pfeiffer, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":306,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"itemData":{"id":306,"type":"article-journal","title":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications: a cross-sectional survey study","container-title":"BMC health services research","page":"123","volume":"18","issue":"1","source":"PubMed","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Double-checking medications is a widely used strategy to enhance safe medication administration in oncology, but there is little evidence to support its effectiveness. The proliferated use of double-checking may be explained by positive attitudes towards checking among nurses. This study investigated oncology nurses' beliefs towards double-checking medication, its relation to beliefs about safety and the influence of nurses' level of experience and proximity to clinical care.\nMETHODS: This was a survey of all oncology nurses in three Swiss hospitals. The questionnaire contained 41 items on 6 domains. Responses were recorded using a 7-point Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify factors linked to strong beliefs in the effectiveness of double-checking.\nRESULTS: Overall, 274 (70%) out of 389 nurses responded (91% female, mean age 37 (standard deviation = 10)). Nurses reported very strong beliefs in the effectiveness and utility of double-checking. They were also confident about their own performance in double-checking. Nurses widely believed that double checking produced safety (e.g., 86% believed errors of individuals could be intercepted with double-checks). In contrast, some limitations of double-checking were also recognized, e.g., 33% of nurses reported that double checking caused frequent interruptions and 28% reported that double-checking was done superficially in their unit. Regression analysis revealed that beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking were mainly associated with beliefs in safety production (p < 0.001). Nurses with experience in barcode scanning held less strong beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking (p = 0.006). In contrast to our expectations, there were no differences in beliefs between any professional sub-groups.\nCONCLUSION: The widespread and strong believe in the effectiveness of double-checking is linked to beliefs about safety production and co-exists with acknowledgement of the major disadvantages of double-checking by humans. These results are important factors to consider when any existing procedures are adapted or new checking procedures are implemented.","DOI":"10.1186/s12913-018-2937-9","ISSN":"1472-6963","note":"PMID: 29454347\nPMCID: PMC5816392","shortTitle":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications","journalAbbreviation":"BMC Health Serv Res","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]],"season":"17"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach, Taxis, & Pfeiffer, 2018). Every question was documented with 7 points Likert rule. The results were depicted via regression analysis that has positively responded with 86% rate ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"cZYkedPg","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":306,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"itemData":{"id":306,"type":"article-journal","title":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications: a cross-sectional survey study","container-title":"BMC health services research","page":"123","volume":"18","issue":"1","source":"PubMed","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Double-checking medications is a widely used strategy to enhance safe medication administration in oncology, but there is little evidence to support its effectiveness. The proliferated use of double-checking may be explained by positive attitudes towards checking among nurses. This study investigated oncology nurses' beliefs towards double-checking medication, its relation to beliefs about safety and the influence of nurses' level of experience and proximity to clinical care.\nMETHODS: This was a survey of all oncology nurses in three Swiss hospitals. The questionnaire contained 41 items on 6 domains. Responses were recorded using a 7-point Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify factors linked to strong beliefs in the effectiveness of double-checking.\nRESULTS: Overall, 274 (70%) out of 389 nurses responded (91% female, mean age 37 (standard deviation = 10)). Nurses reported very strong beliefs in the effectiveness and utility of double-checking. They were also confident about their own performance in double-checking. Nurses widely believed that double checking produced safety (e.g., 86% believed errors of individuals could be intercepted with double-checks). In contrast, some limitations of double-checking were also recognized, e.g., 33% of nurses reported that double checking caused frequent interruptions and 28% reported that double-checking was done superficially in their unit. Regression analysis revealed that beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking were mainly associated with beliefs in safety production (p < 0.001). Nurses with experience in barcode scanning held less strong beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking (p = 0.006). In contrast to our expectations, there were no differences in beliefs between any professional sub-groups.\nCONCLUSION: The widespread and strong believe in the effectiveness of double-checking is linked to beliefs about safety production and co-exists with acknowledgement of the major disadvantages of double-checking by humans. These results are important factors to consider when any existing procedures are adapted or new checking procedures are implemented.","DOI":"10.1186/s12913-018-2937-9","ISSN":"1472-6963","note":"PMID: 29454347\nPMCID: PMC5816392","shortTitle":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications","journalAbbreviation":"BMC Health Serv Res","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]],"season":"17"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach et al., 2018). They have suggested that the reduction is possible in administering medication if there is a double check policy ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2khllkb5bo","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":306,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"itemData":{"id":306,"type":"article-journal","title":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications: a cross-sectional survey study","container-title":"BMC health services research","page":"123","volume":"18","issue":"1","source":"PubMed","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Double-checking medications is a widely used strategy to enhance safe medication administration in oncology, but there is little evidence to support its effectiveness. The proliferated use of double-checking may be explained by positive attitudes towards checking among nurses. This study investigated oncology nurses' beliefs towards double-checking medication, its relation to beliefs about safety and the influence of nurses' level of experience and proximity to clinical care.\nMETHODS: This was a survey of all oncology nurses in three Swiss hospitals. The questionnaire contained 41 items on 6 domains. Responses were recorded using a 7-point Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify factors linked to strong beliefs in the effectiveness of double-checking.\nRESULTS: Overall, 274 (70%) out of 389 nurses responded (91% female, mean age 37 (standard deviation = 10)). Nurses reported very strong beliefs in the effectiveness and utility of double-checking. They were also confident about their own performance in double-checking. Nurses widely believed that double checking produced safety (e.g., 86% believed errors of individuals could be intercepted with double-checks). In contrast, some limitations of double-checking were also recognized, e.g., 33% of nurses reported that double checking caused frequent interruptions and 28% reported that double-checking was done superficially in their unit. Regression analysis revealed that beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking were mainly associated with beliefs in safety production (p < 0.001). Nurses with experience in barcode scanning held less strong beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking (p = 0.006). In contrast to our expectations, there were no differences in beliefs between any professional sub-groups.\nCONCLUSION: The widespread and strong believe in the effectiveness of double-checking is linked to beliefs about safety production and co-exists with acknowledgement of the major disadvantages of double-checking by humans. These results are important factors to consider when any existing procedures are adapted or new checking procedures are implemented.","DOI":"10.1186/s12913-018-2937-9","ISSN":"1472-6963","note":"PMID: 29454347\nPMCID: PMC5816392","shortTitle":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications","journalAbbreviation":"BMC Health Serv Res","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]],"season":"17"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach et al., 2018). However, 33% have suggested that there were errors and interruptions while double-checking before administering medicines ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"8khQ87Xw","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Schwappach et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":306,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/XCBNT8VR"],"itemData":{"id":306,"type":"article-journal","title":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications: a cross-sectional survey study","container-title":"BMC health services research","page":"123","volume":"18","issue":"1","source":"PubMed","abstract":"BACKGROUND: Double-checking medications is a widely used strategy to enhance safe medication administration in oncology, but there is little evidence to support its effectiveness. The proliferated use of double-checking may be explained by positive attitudes towards checking among nurses. This study investigated oncology nurses' beliefs towards double-checking medication, its relation to beliefs about safety and the influence of nurses' level of experience and proximity to clinical care.\nMETHODS: This was a survey of all oncology nurses in three Swiss hospitals. The questionnaire contained 41 items on 6 domains. Responses were recorded using a 7-point Likert scale. Multiple regression analysis was used to identify factors linked to strong beliefs in the effectiveness of double-checking.\nRESULTS: Overall, 274 (70%) out of 389 nurses responded (91% female, mean age 37 (standard deviation = 10)). Nurses reported very strong beliefs in the effectiveness and utility of double-checking. They were also confident about their own performance in double-checking. Nurses widely believed that double checking produced safety (e.g., 86% believed errors of individuals could be intercepted with double-checks). In contrast, some limitations of double-checking were also recognized, e.g., 33% of nurses reported that double checking caused frequent interruptions and 28% reported that double-checking was done superficially in their unit. Regression analysis revealed that beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking were mainly associated with beliefs in safety production (p < 0.001). Nurses with experience in barcode scanning held less strong beliefs in effectiveness of double-checking (p = 0.006). In contrast to our expectations, there were no differences in beliefs between any professional sub-groups.\nCONCLUSION: The widespread and strong believe in the effectiveness of double-checking is linked to beliefs about safety production and co-exists with acknowledgement of the major disadvantages of double-checking by humans. These results are important factors to consider when any existing procedures are adapted or new checking procedures are implemented.","DOI":"10.1186/s12913-018-2937-9","ISSN":"1472-6963","note":"PMID: 29454347\nPMCID: PMC5816392","shortTitle":"Oncology nurses' beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications","journalAbbreviation":"BMC Health Serv Res","language":"eng","author":[{"family":"Schwappach","given":"D. L. B."},{"family":"Taxis","given":"Katja"},{"family":"Pfeiffer","given":"Yvonne"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]],"season":"17"}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schwappach et al., 2018). Double-check policy is directly linked with staff satisfaction; the safety of the patient and disadvantages have been reduced to a greater extent as compared to a single check.
How well the existing literature addressed the problem? Barriers and Challenges
The available researches and the studies have substantial information that has focused the scientists recognizing the problem and the barriers to overcome the issue. With workload problems impending deeply over physicians, autonomous twofold checks should merely be castoff for very discerning high-risk tasks or high-alert medicines (not all) that most permit their use ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a8au75bbpe","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Heneka, Shaw, Rowett, Lapkin, & Phillips, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Heneka, Shaw, Rowett, Lapkin, & Phillips, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":328,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/R4GQQTRG"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/R4GQQTRG"],"itemData":{"id":328,"type":"article-journal","title":"Exploring factors contributing to medication errors with opioids in Australian specialist palliative care inpatient services: A multi-incident analysis","container-title":"Journal of palliative medicine","page":"825-835","volume":"21","issue":"6","author":[{"family":"Heneka","given":"Nicole"},{"family":"Shaw","given":"Tim"},{"family":"Rowett","given":"Debra"},{"family":"Lapkin","given":"Samuel"},{"family":"Phillips","given":"Jane L."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Heneka, Shaw, Rowett, Lapkin, & Phillips, 2018). Double-check is a process that consumes time, and in a healthcare facility, there is a workload that consumes a lot of time of the healthcare provider ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"ap63mmsr3l","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Litman, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Litman, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":323,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/6453XQE7"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/6453XQE7"],"itemData":{"id":323,"type":"article-journal","title":"How to prevent medication errors in the operating room? Take away the human factor","container-title":"British journal of anaesthesia","page":"438-440","volume":"120","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Litman","given":"R. S."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Litman, 2018). Deficiency of time to transmit out the examination procedure correctly was a robust, recurrent subject in studies of unsuccessful double checks and workforce confrontation to this policy ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a2oqs11ffks","properties":{"formattedCitation":"{\\rtf (Foged, N\\uc0\\u248{}rholm, Andersen, & Petersen, 2018)}","plainCitation":"(Foged, Nørholm, Andersen, & Petersen, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":325,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GHPH3YZ9"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GHPH3YZ9"],"itemData":{"id":325,"type":"article-journal","title":"Nurses’ perspectives on how an e‐message system supports cross‐sectoral communication in relation to medication administration: A qualitative study","container-title":"Journal of clinical nursing","page":"795-806","volume":"27","issue":"3-4","author":[{"family":"Foged","given":"Signe"},{"family":"Nørholm","given":"Vibeke"},{"family":"Andersen","given":"Ove"},{"family":"Petersen","given":"Helle Vendel"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Foged, Nørholm, Andersen, & Petersen, 2018). It has been observed in various studies that staff is reluctant to adopt the new and additional duties assigned to them. It includes the double-check of medication before administration to the patients. Nurses have shown a positive attitude towards the double-check, however, have suggested that it took 20 minutes to double-check medication before administering and lack of information technology usage is also influencing the delays and wrong administration of medication ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a235nh0vjon","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Hu, Chiu, & Wu, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Hu, Chiu, & Wu, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":331,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/3GX89UDH"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/3GX89UDH"],"itemData":{"id":331,"type":"article-journal","title":"Threats of Medication Process in Outpatients: Qualitative Study With Physicians, Nurses, and Pharmacists","author":[{"family":"Hu","given":"Sophia H."},{"family":"Chiu","given":"Yi-Chun"},{"family":"Wu","given":"Lei-Lan"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Hu, Chiu, & Wu, 2018). Studies have suggested that it is more profound in outcomes to double-check medication, but the time-consuming activities are usually not practical in healthcare facilities.
Four major areas have been identified in the medication practices such as understanding of the medication errors including how and what kind of errors usually happen in the healthcare facilities ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a1tc4dsudad","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alomari, Wilson, Solman, Bajorek, & Tinsley, 2018)","plainCitation":"(Alomari, Wilson, Solman, Bajorek, & Tinsley, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":313,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/UTDP5UZW"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/UTDP5UZW"],"itemData":{"id":313,"type":"article-journal","title":"Pediatric nurses’ perceptions of medication safety and medication error: a mixed methods study","container-title":"Comprehensive child and adolescent nursing","page":"94-110","volume":"41","issue":"2","author":[{"family":"Alomari","given":"Albara"},{"family":"Wilson","given":"Val"},{"family":"Solman","given":"Annette"},{"family":"Bajorek","given":"Beata"},{"family":"Tinsley","given":"Patricia"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alomari, Wilson, Solman, Bajorek, & Tinsley, 2018). The second important factor identified was the busy schedule of the staff and healthcare providers (Alomari, Wilson, Solman, Bajorek, & Tinsley, 2018). This includes the duty routine, self-administration, single check, double-check and time consumption in administering and delivering the services ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a243g3kscuh","properties":{"formattedCitation":"{\\rtf (Rishoej, Almarsd\\uc0\\u243{}ttir, Thybo Christesen, Hallas, & Juel Kjeldsen, 2018)}","plainCitation":"(Rishoej, Almarsdóttir, Thybo Christesen, Hallas, & Juel Kjeldsen, 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":327,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/LD6PI7IT"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/LD6PI7IT"],"itemData":{"id":327,"type":"article-journal","title":"Identifying and assessing potential harm of medication errors and potentially unsafe medication practices in paediatric hospital settings: a field study","container-title":"Therapeutic advances in drug safety","page":"509-522","volume":"9","issue":"9","author":[{"family":"Rishoej","given":"Rikke Mie"},{"family":"Almarsdóttir","given":"Anna Birna"},{"family":"Thybo Christesen","given":"Henrik"},{"family":"Hallas","given":"Jesper"},{"family":"Juel Kjeldsen","given":"Lene"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Rishoej, Almarsdóttir, Thybo Christesen, Hallas, & Juel Kjeldsen, 2018). The third profound factor that also hindered the way of double-check policy is the physical environment such as the environment of the healthcare facility, healthcare rooms, poor atmosphere, non-cooperation from the staff, and the patient-centred areas including the interruptions from parents and patient relations ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"as10lp77vm","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Alomari et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Alomari et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":313,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/UTDP5UZW"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/UTDP5UZW"],"itemData":{"id":313,"type":"article-journal","title":"Pediatric nurses’ perceptions of medication safety and medication error: a mixed methods study","container-title":"Comprehensive child and adolescent nursing","page":"94-110","volume":"41","issue":"2","author":[{"family":"Alomari","given":"Albara"},{"family":"Wilson","given":"Val"},{"family":"Solman","given":"Annette"},{"family":"Bajorek","given":"Beata"},{"family":"Tinsley","given":"Patricia"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Alomari et al., 2018). Fourth important factor identified was the compliance with the policy related to the medications and practices ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a13f3m1l5e0","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Schutijser et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Schutijser et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":319,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/VVMUMEXC"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/VVMUMEXC"],"itemData":{"id":319,"type":"article-journal","title":"Nurse compliance with a protocol for safe injectable medication administration: comparison of two multicentre observational studies","container-title":"BMJ open","page":"e019648","volume":"8","issue":"1","author":[{"family":"Schutijser","given":"Bernadette"},{"family":"Klopotowska","given":"Joanna Ewa"},{"family":"Jongerden","given":"Irene"},{"family":"Spreeuwenberg","given":"Peter"},{"family":"Wagner","given":"Cordula"},{"family":"Bruijne","given":"Martine","non-dropping-particle":"de"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Schutijser et al., 2018). Family involvement in understanding medication drug usage and its adverse effects are also associated with the wrong administration of medicines ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"at1auva3t5","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(El-Saifi, Moyle, & Jones, 2019)","plainCitation":"(El-Saifi, Moyle, & Jones, 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":332,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/RMIMCDEY"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/RMIMCDEY"],"itemData":{"id":332,"type":"article-journal","title":"Family caregivers’ perspectives on medication adherence challenges in older people with dementia: a qualitative study","container-title":"Aging & mental health","page":"1333-1339","volume":"23","issue":"10","author":[{"family":"El-Saifi","given":"Najwan"},{"family":"Moyle","given":"Wendy"},{"family":"Jones","given":"Cindy"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (El-Saifi, Moyle, & Jones, 2019). It involves the complete details of the administration of the medications, the guidelines related to the medicines, preparation training and the administering rules of the healthcare facilities ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"a25t7m29l8i","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Chua et al., 2019)","plainCitation":"(Chua et al., 2019)"},"citationItems":[{"id":311,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/GF6ULSYA"],"itemData":{"id":311,"type":"article-journal","title":"Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines?","container-title":"Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing","page":"246","volume":"6","issue":"3","author":[{"family":"Chua","given":"Gek Phin"},{"family":"Lee","given":"Kim Hua"},{"family":"Peralta","given":"Gemma Diente"},{"family":"Lim","given":"John Heng Chi"}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2019"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Chua et al., 2019).
Unfavourable conditions of the healthcare facilities and the time-consuming policies have a significant influence on double-checking policies of administering medication to the patients ADDIN ZOTERO_ITEM CSL_CITATION {"citationID":"av2oi2d741","properties":{"formattedCitation":"(Keers et al., 2018)","plainCitation":"(Keers et al., 2018)"},"citationItems":[{"id":326,"uris":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/IV8SP6UI"],"uri":["http://zotero.org/users/local/p8kwKNoG/items/IV8SP6UI"],"itemData":{"id":326,"type":"article-journal","title":"What causes medication administration errors in a mental health hospital? A qualitative study with nursing staff","container-title":"PloS one","page":"e0206233","volume":"13","issue":"10","author":[{"family":"Keers","given":"Richard N."},{"family":"Plácido","given":"Madalena"},{"family":"Bennett","given":"Karen"},{"family":"Clayton","given":"Kristen"},{"family":"Brown","given":"Petra"},{"family":"Ashcroft","given":"Darren M."}],"issued":{"date-parts":[["2018"]]}}}],"schema":"https://github.com/citation-style-language/schema/raw/master/csl-citation.json"} (Keers et al., 2018). Assignments and load, recurrent disruptions to the procedure, underprivileged physical setting scheme particularly in radiation departments, absence of preparation space, and unfeasible medicine rules are recognized as barriers to nontoxic medication practice (Christensen, Nause‐Osthoff, Waldman, Spratt, & Hearn, 2019).
References
ADDIN ZOTERO_BIBL {"custom":[]} CSL_BIBLIOGRAPHY Alomari, A., Wilson, V., Solman, A., Bajorek, B., & Tinsley, P. (2018). Pediatric nurses' perceptions of medication safety and medication error: a mixed-methods study. Comprehensive Child and Adolescent Nursing, 41(2), 94–110.
Alsulami, Z., Choonara, I., & Conroy, S. (2014). Paediatric nurses’ adherence to the double-checking process during medication administration in a children’s hospital: an observational study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 70(6), 1404–1413. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.12303
Athanasakis, E. (2019). A meta‐synthesis of how registered nurses make sense of their lived experiences of medication errors. Journal of Clinical Nursing.
Chua, G. P., Lee, K. H., Peralta, G. D., & Lim, J. H. C. (2019). Medication Safety: A Need to Relook at Double-Checking Medicines? Asia-Pacific Journal of Oncology Nursing, 6(3), 246.
dos Santos, H. D., Ulbrich, A. H. D., Woloszyn, V., & Vieira, R. (2018). DDC-outlier: preventing medication errors using unsupervised learning. IEEE Journal of Biomedical and Health Informatics, 23(2), 874–881.
El-Saifi, N., Moyle, W., & Jones, C. (2019). Family caregivers’ perspectives on medication adherence challenges in older people with dementia: a qualitative study. Aging & Mental Health, 23(10), 1333–1339.
Foged, S., Nørholm, V., Andersen, O., & Petersen, H. V. (2018). Nurses’ perspectives on how an e‐message system supports cross‐sectoral communication in relation to medication administration: A qualitative study. Journal of Clinical Nursing, 27(3–4), 795–806.
Fu, Y., Han, H. H., Zhang, J., He, X. P., Feringa, B. L., & Tian, H. (2018). Photocontrolled Fluorescence “Double-Check” Bioimaging Enabled by a Glycoprobe–Protein Hybrid. Journal of the American Chemical Society, 140(28), 8671-8674.
Heneka, N., Shaw, T., Rowett, D., Lapkin, S., & Phillips, J. L. (2018). Exploring factors contributing to medication errors with opioids in Australian specialist palliative care inpatient services: A multi-incident analysis. Journal of Palliative Medicine, 21(6), 825–835.
Hu, S. H., Chiu, Y.-C., & Wu, L.-L. (2018). Threats of Medication Process in Outpatients: Qualitative Study With Physicians, Nurses, and Pharmacists.
Keers, R. N., Plácido, M., Bennett, K., Clayton, K., Brown, P., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2018). What causes medication administration errors in a mental health hospital? A qualitative study with nursing staff. PloS One, 13(10), e0206233.
Koyama, A. K., Maddox, C.-S. S., Li, L., Bucknall, T., & Westbrook, J. I. (2019). Effectiveness of double checking to reduce medication administration errors: a systematic review. BMJ Quality & Safety, bmjqs-2019-009552. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjqs-2019-009552
Leahy, I. C., Lavoie, M., Zurakowski, D., Baier, A. W., & Brustowicz, R. M. (2018). Medication errors in a pediatric anesthesia setting: Incidence, etiologies, and error reduction strategies. Journal of clinical anesthesia, 49, 107-111.
Litman, R. S. (2018). How to prevent medication errors in the operating room? Take away the human factor. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 120(3), 438–440.
Rishoej, R. M., Almarsdóttir, A. B., Thybo Christesen, H., Hallas, J., & Juel Kjeldsen, L. (2018). Identifying and assessing potential harm of medication errors and potentially unsafe medication practices in paediatric hospital settings: a field study. Therapeutic Advances in Drug Safety, 9(9), 509–522.
Rosenfeld, E., Kinney, S., Weiner, C., Newall, F., Williams, A., Cranswick, N., … Manias, E. (2018). Interdisciplinary medication decision making by pharmacists in pediatric hospital settings: An ethnographic study. Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 14(3), 269–278.
Schutijser, B., Klopotowska, J. E., Jongerden, I., Spreeuwenberg, P., Wagner, C., & de Bruijne, M. (2018). Nurse compliance with a protocol for safe injectable medication administration: comparison of two multicentre observational studies. BMJ Open, 8(1), e019648.
Schwappach, D. L. B., Pfeiffer, Y., & Taxis, K. (2016). Medication double-checking procedures in clinical practice: a cross-sectional survey of oncology nurses’ experiences. BMJ Open, 6(6), e011394. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2016-011394
Schwappach, D. L. B., Taxis, K., & Pfeiffer, Y. (2018). Oncology nurses’ beliefs and attitudes towards the double-check of chemotherapy medications: a cross-sectional survey study. BMC Health Services Research, 18(1), 123. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-018-2937-9
Treiber, L. A., & Jones, J. H. (2018). After the Medication Error: Recent Nursing Graduates' Reflections on Adequacy of Education. Journal of Nursing Education, 57(5), 275-280.
