Understanding and comparing differences in reported medication administration error rates

Douglas S. Wakefield, Bonnie J. Wakefield, Tyrone Borders, Tanya Uden-Holman, Mary Blegen, Thomas Vaughn

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

The prevention of medication administration errors (MAEs) represents a central focus of hospitals' quality improvement and risk management initiatives. Because the identification and reporting of MAEs is a nonautomated and voluntary process, it is essential to understand the extent to which errors may not be reported. This study reports the results of 2 multihospital surveys in which over 1300 staff nurses in each survey estimated the extent to which various types of nonintravenous (non-IV) and intravenous (IV)-related MAEs are actually being reported on their nursing units. Overall, respondents estimated that about 60% of MAEs are actually being reported. Considerable differences in estimated rates of MAE reporting were found between staff and supervisors working on the same patient care units. A simulation based on actual and perceived rates of MAE reporting is presented to estimate the range of errors not being reported. Implications regarding the reliability, validity, and completeness of MAEs actually being reported are discussed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)73-80
Number of pages8
JournalAmerican Journal of Medical Quality
Volume14
Issue number2
DOIs
StatePublished - 1999

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Health Policy

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Understanding and comparing differences in reported medication administration error rates'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this