Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database
- PMID: 30364852
- PMCID: PMC6199682
- DOI: 10.1177/2042098618773013
Medication errors involving intravenous patient-controlled analgesia: results from the 2005-2015 MEDMARX database
Abstract
Background: The aim of this study was to determine the current magnitude and characteristics of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) errors, and to identify opportunities for improving the PCA modality.
Methods: We conducted a descriptive analysis of IV-PCA medication errors submitted to the MEDMARX database. Events were restricted to those occurring in inpatient hospital settings between 1 January 2005 and 31 December 2015. IV-PCA errors were classified by error category, cause of error, error type, level of care rendered, and actions taken.
Results: A total of 1948 IV-PCA errors were identified as potential errors (3.9%), nonharmful errors (89.5%), or harmful errors (6.7%) based on the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention taxonomy for categorizing medication errors. Of these, 19.1% required a clinical intervention to address the deleterious effects of the error, indicating an underestimation of the risks associated with IV-PCA errors. The most frequent types of errors were improper dose/quantity (43.2%) and omission errors (19.9%). While human performance deficit was the leading cause of error (50.2%), other common causes included failure to follow procedure and protocol (42.2%) and improper use of the pump (22.7%). Although remedial actions were often taken to prevent error recurrence, actions were taken to rectify the systemic deficits that led to errors in only a minority of cases (11.8%).
Conclusion: Preventable errors continue to pose unnecessary risks to patients receiving IV-PCA. Multimodal analgesic regimens and novel PCA systems that reduce human error are needed to prevent errors while preserving the advantages of PCA for the management of acute pain.
Keywords: acute pain; intervention; medication errors; patient-controlled analgesia.
Conflict of interest statement
Conflict of interest statement: The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest.
Figures






References
-
- McNicol ED, Ferguson MC, Hudcova J. Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus non-patient controlled opioid analgesia for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; 6, http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com.ezproxy.bu.edu/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD003... (accessed 8 June 2017). - DOI - PMC - PubMed
-
- Meissner B, Nelson W, Hicks R (Rod), et al. The rate and costs attributable to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia errors. Hosp Pharm 2009; 44: 312–324.
-
- Ballantyne JC, Carr DB, Chalmers TC, et al. Postoperative patient-controlled analgesia: meta-analyses of initial randomized control trials. J Clin Anesth 1993; 5: 182–193. - PubMed
-
- Hudcova J, McNicol E, Quah C, et al. Patient controlled opioid analgesia versus conventional opioid analgesia for postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 4: CD003348. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources