help button home button JAMIA Bigger figures
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH

First published August 21, 2007 as JAMIA PrePrint; doi:10.1197/jamia.M2359
Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association 2007;14(6):756-764
© 2007 American Medical Informatics Association


A more recent version of this article appeared on November 1, 2007
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
M2359v1
14/6/756    most recent
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by FitzHenry, F.
Right arrow Articles by Miller, R. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by FitzHenry, F.
Right arrow Articles by Miller, R. A.

Submitted on December 29, 2006
Accepted on July 25, 2007

Medication Administration Discrepancies Persist Despite Electronic Ordering

Fern FitzHenry RN, MM, PhD1*, Josh F. Peterson MD, MPH2, Mark Arrieta BS1, Lemuel R. Waitman PhD1, Jonathan S. Schildcrout PhD3, and Randolph A. Miller MD1

Affiliation of the authors: 1 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), Nashville, TN ; 2 Department of Biomedical Informatics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), Nashville, TN; Center for Health Services Research, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC), Nashville, TN ; 3 Department of Biostatistics, Vanderbilt University Medical Center (VUMC) Nashville TN

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.

Background Up to 38% of inpatient medication errors occur at the administration stage. Although they reduce prescribing errors, computerized provider order entry (CPOE) systems do not prevent administration errors or timing discrepancies. This study determined the degree to which CPOE medication orders matched actual dose administration times.

Methods At a 658-bed academic hospital with CPOE but lacking electronic medication administration charting, authors randomly selected adult patients with eligible medication orders from historical 1999-2003 CPOE log files. Retrospective manual chart audits compared expected (from CPOE) and actual timing of medication administrations. Outcomes included: dose omissions, median lag times between ordered and charted administrations, unauthorized doses, wrong dose errors, and the rate of nurses' medication schedule shifting.

Results Dose omissions occurred in 756 of 6019 (12.6%) audited administration opportunities; only 313 of the omissions (5.2% of opportunities) were unexplained. Wrong doses and unexpected doses occurred for 0.1% and 0.7% of opportunities, respectively. Median lag from expected first dose to actual charted administration time was 27 minutes (IQR 0-127). Nursing staff shifted from ordered to alternate administration schedules for 10.7% of regularly scheduled recurring medication orders. Chart review identified reasons for dose omissions, delays, and dose shifting.

Conclusion Inpatient CPOE orders are legible and conveyed electronically to nurses and the pharmacy. Nonetheless, ward-based medication administrations do not consistently occur as ordered. Medication administration discrepancies are likely to persist even after implementing CPOE and bar-coded medication administration unless recommended interventions are made to address issues such as determining the true urgency of medication administration, avoiding overlapping duplicative medication orders, and developing a safe means for shifting dosing schedules.







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Copyright © 1994 by the American Medical Informatics Association.