Skip to main content

Table 1 Rates of medication administration errors

From: The impact of a novel medication scanner on administration errors in the hospital setting: a before and after feasibility study

Type of error

Pre-intervention number of errors (% of OE)

Post-intervention number of errors (% of OE)

95% CI*

p value*

95% CI (adjusted for heterogeneity) for the coefficient in the fitted logit model corresponding to the `period' indicator. For the difference in error rate pre- and post-intervention†

p value (adjusted for heterogeneity) †

Total errors

739 (69.1)

302 (69.9)

− 4.6 to 5.9%

0.773

− 2.2 to 0.1

0.0753

Non-Timing errors

51 (4.77)

11 (2.55)

− 4.2% to 0.1%

0.050

− 2.0 to 0.2

0.115

Omission errors

17 (1.6)

4 (0.9)

− 1.9% to 0.9%

0.326

− 2.3 to 1.3

0.579

Omission errors due to lack of ward stock

9 (0.8)

3 (0.7)

− 1.1% to 1.3%

1.0

− 3.4 to 3.3

0.976

(% of total number of omission errors in that period)

− 52.9

− 75

− 30.6% to 55.6%

0.486

  

Other administration errors

34 (3.2)

7 (1.6)

− 3.2% to 0.4

0.096

− 2.6 to 0.8

0.295

Wrong Dose

1 (0.09)

0 (0.0)

− 0.6% to 0.8%

1.0

Result could not be generated

-

Documentation Error

28 (2.6)

7 (1.6)

− 2.5% to 0.9%

0.263

− 3704.1 to 3728.2

0.9949***

Wrong Form

5 (0.5)

0 (0.0)

− 1.1% to 0.5%

0.183

− 1714.3 to 1694.2

0.9908***

Timing errors

688 (64.4)

291 (67.4)

− 2.6% to 8.3%

0.282

− 1.6 to 0.5

0.318¢

Early 1–2 h% of timing errors

25 (2.3)

34 (7.9)

3.1% to 8.6%

 < 0.00001

3.1 to 15.7

0.00341

 

− 3.6

− 11.7

4.4% to 12.6%

 < 0.00001

  

Early > 2 h% of timing errors

3 (0.28)

0 (0.0000)

− 0.9% to 0.7%

0.286

− 247,877.8 to 247,831.9

0.9999

 

(0.44)

(0.0000)

1.3% to 1.0%

0.271

  

Late 1–2 h% of timing errors

568 (53.1)

229 (53.0)

− 5.8% to 5.5%

0.9711

− 1.3 to 2.7

0.493

 

− 82.6

− 78.7

− 9.7% to 1.5%

0.159

  

Late > 2 h% of timing errors

92 (8.6)

28 (6.5)

− 4.9% to 1.0%

0.174

− 8.0 to − 0.7

0.0188

 

− 13.4

− 9.6

− 7.9% to 0.9%

0.103

  
  1. OE- opportunity for error
  2. *p value reported using the Z-pooled Exact Test (exact unconditional tests for 2 × 2 contingency tables)
  3. p value adjusted for heterogeneity including possible correlation effects within nurses, patients, and observers
  4. ¢ We did not identify a significant impact of MedEye on the overall rate of timing errors but did note a significant decrease with nurse time on duty. It is possible this was due to the busier morning drug rounds, which increased the likelihood of nurses making a mistake
  5. We also noted a strongly significant decreasing effect of nurse time on duty on late 1–2 h errors. This was possibly associated with calmer and quieter drug rounds that occurred later in the day
  6. ***Fitted models do not include Nurse time on duty as models do not fit otherwise
  7. °There were no reports of the following ‘other—error subtypes’: wrong patient, wrong administration equipment used, wrong medication error, administration without order, route error, failure to recognise drug-drug interaction, patient had a documented allergy to medication, directions/ monitoring error