Identifying and Reducing Insulin Errors in the Simulated Military Critical Care Air Transport Environment: A Human Factors Approach.

IF 1.2 4区 医学 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL Military Medicine Pub Date : 2025-01-16 DOI:10.1093/milmed/usae286
Lane L Frasier, Mark Cheney, Joshua Burkhardt, Mark Alderman, Eric Nelson, Melissa Proctor, Daniel Brown, William T Davis, Maia P Smith, Richard Strilka
{"title":"Identifying and Reducing Insulin Errors in the Simulated Military Critical Care Air Transport Environment: A Human Factors Approach.","authors":"Lane L Frasier, Mark Cheney, Joshua Burkhardt, Mark Alderman, Eric Nelson, Melissa Proctor, Daniel Brown, William T Davis, Maia P Smith, Richard Strilka","doi":"10.1093/milmed/usae286","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>During high-fidelity simulations in the Critical Care Air Transport (CCAT) Advanced course, we identified a high frequency of insulin medication errors and sought strategies to reduce them using a human factors approach.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>Of 169 eligible CCAT simulations, 22 were randomly selected for retrospective audio-video review to establish a baseline frequency of insulin medication errors. Using the Human Factors Analysis Classification System, dosing errors, defined as a physician ordering an inappropriate dose, were categorized as decision-based; administration errors, defined as a clinician preparing and administering a dose different than ordered, were categorized as skill-based. Next, 3 a priori interventions were developed to decrease the frequency of insulin medication errors, and these were grouped into 2 study arms. Arm 1 included a didactic session reviewing a sliding-scale insulin (SSI) dosing protocol and a hands-on exercise requiring all CCAT teams to practice preparing 10 units of insulin including a 2-person check. Arm 2 contained arm 1 interventions and added an SSI cognitive aid available to students during simulation. Frequency and type of insulin medication errors were collected for both arms with 93 simulations for arm 1 (January-August 2021) and 139 for arm 2 (August 2021-July 2022). The frequency of decision-based and skill-based errors was compared across control and intervention arms.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Baseline insulin medication error rates were as follows: decision-based error occurred in 6/22 (27.3%) simulations and skill-based error occurred in 6/22 (27.3%). Five of the 6 skill-based errors resulted in administration of a 10-fold higher dose than ordered. The post-intervention decision-based error rates were 9/93 (9.7%) and 23/139 (2.2%), respectively, for arms 1 and 2. Compared to baseline error rates, both arm 1 (P = .04) and arm 2 (P < .001) had a significantly lower rate of decision-based errors. Additionally, arm 2 had a significantly lower decision-based error rate compared to arm 1 (P = .015). For skill-based preparation errors, 1/93 (1.1%) occurred in arm 1 and 4/139 (2.9%) occurred in arm 2. Compared to baseline, this represents a significant decrease in skill-based error in both arm 1 (P < .001) and arm 2 (P < .001). There were no significant differences in skill-based error between arms 1 and 2.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study demonstrates the value of descriptive error analysis during high-fidelity simulation using audio-video review and effective risk mitigation using training and cognitive aids to reduce medication errors in CCAT. As demonstrated by post-intervention observations, a human factors approach successfully reduced decision-based error by using didactic training and cognitive aids and reduced skill-based error using hands-on training. We recommend the development of a Clinical Practice Guideline including an SSI protocol, guidelines for a 2-person check, and a cognitive aid for implementation with deployed CCAT teams. Furthermore, hands-on training for insulin preparation and administration should be incorporated into home station sustainment training to reduced medication errors in the operational environment.</p>","PeriodicalId":18638,"journal":{"name":"Military Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"342-350"},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Military Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/usae286","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: During high-fidelity simulations in the Critical Care Air Transport (CCAT) Advanced course, we identified a high frequency of insulin medication errors and sought strategies to reduce them using a human factors approach.

Materials and methods: Of 169 eligible CCAT simulations, 22 were randomly selected for retrospective audio-video review to establish a baseline frequency of insulin medication errors. Using the Human Factors Analysis Classification System, dosing errors, defined as a physician ordering an inappropriate dose, were categorized as decision-based; administration errors, defined as a clinician preparing and administering a dose different than ordered, were categorized as skill-based. Next, 3 a priori interventions were developed to decrease the frequency of insulin medication errors, and these were grouped into 2 study arms. Arm 1 included a didactic session reviewing a sliding-scale insulin (SSI) dosing protocol and a hands-on exercise requiring all CCAT teams to practice preparing 10 units of insulin including a 2-person check. Arm 2 contained arm 1 interventions and added an SSI cognitive aid available to students during simulation. Frequency and type of insulin medication errors were collected for both arms with 93 simulations for arm 1 (January-August 2021) and 139 for arm 2 (August 2021-July 2022). The frequency of decision-based and skill-based errors was compared across control and intervention arms.

Results: Baseline insulin medication error rates were as follows: decision-based error occurred in 6/22 (27.3%) simulations and skill-based error occurred in 6/22 (27.3%). Five of the 6 skill-based errors resulted in administration of a 10-fold higher dose than ordered. The post-intervention decision-based error rates were 9/93 (9.7%) and 23/139 (2.2%), respectively, for arms 1 and 2. Compared to baseline error rates, both arm 1 (P = .04) and arm 2 (P < .001) had a significantly lower rate of decision-based errors. Additionally, arm 2 had a significantly lower decision-based error rate compared to arm 1 (P = .015). For skill-based preparation errors, 1/93 (1.1%) occurred in arm 1 and 4/139 (2.9%) occurred in arm 2. Compared to baseline, this represents a significant decrease in skill-based error in both arm 1 (P < .001) and arm 2 (P < .001). There were no significant differences in skill-based error between arms 1 and 2.

Conclusions: This study demonstrates the value of descriptive error analysis during high-fidelity simulation using audio-video review and effective risk mitigation using training and cognitive aids to reduce medication errors in CCAT. As demonstrated by post-intervention observations, a human factors approach successfully reduced decision-based error by using didactic training and cognitive aids and reduced skill-based error using hands-on training. We recommend the development of a Clinical Practice Guideline including an SSI protocol, guidelines for a 2-person check, and a cognitive aid for implementation with deployed CCAT teams. Furthermore, hands-on training for insulin preparation and administration should be incorporated into home station sustainment training to reduced medication errors in the operational environment.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在模拟军事重症空运环境中识别和减少胰岛素错误:人为因素方法。
简介:在重症监护空中转运(CCAT)高级课程的高仿真模拟中,我们发现胰岛素用药失误的频率很高,并寻求使用人为因素方法减少失误的策略:在 169 个符合条件的 CCAT 模拟中,随机抽取了 22 个进行回顾性音频视频审查,以确定胰岛素用药错误的基线频率。利用人为因素分析分类系统,将剂量错误(定义为医生下达了不适当的剂量)归类为决策型错误;将给药错误(定义为临床医生准备和给药的剂量与医嘱不同)归类为技能型错误。接下来,为减少胰岛素用药错误的发生频率,我们制定了 3 项先验干预措施,并将其分为 2 个研究臂。研究臂 1 包括一个回顾滑动量表胰岛素 (SSI) 给药方案的说教课程和一个实践练习,要求所有 CCAT 小组练习准备 10 单位的胰岛素,包括双人检查。第二组包含第一组的干预措施,并增加了一个 SSI 认知辅助工具,供学生在模拟过程中使用。两组均收集了胰岛素用药错误的频率和类型,其中第一组(2021 年 1 月至 8 月)93 次,第二组(2021 年 8 月至 2022 年 7 月)139 次。比较了对照组和干预组中决策性错误和技能性错误的发生频率:基线胰岛素用药错误率如下:6/22(27.3%)次模拟发生了决策性错误,6/22(27.3%)次发生了技能性错误。在 6 次技能错误中,有 5 次导致给药剂量比医嘱高出 10 倍。干预后,第一组和第二组基于决策的错误率分别为 9/93(9.7%)和 23/139(2.2%)。与基线错误率相比,干预组 1(P = .04)和干预组 2(P 结论:干预组 1 和干预组 2 的错误率均低于基线错误率:这项研究证明了在高仿真模拟过程中利用音频视频回顾进行描述性错误分析以及利用培训和认知辅助工具有效降低风险的价值,从而减少 CCAT 中的用药错误。干预后的观察结果表明,人为因素方法通过使用说教式培训和认知辅助工具成功地减少了决策性错误,并通过动手培训减少了技能性错误。我们建议制定临床实践指南,其中包括 SSI 协议、双人检查指南和认知辅助工具,以便在已部署的 CCAT 团队中实施。此外,应将胰岛素准备和给药的实践培训纳入家庭站持续培训,以减少行动环境中的用药错误。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Military Medicine
Military Medicine MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL-
CiteScore
2.20
自引率
8.30%
发文量
393
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Military Medicine is the official international journal of AMSUS. Articles published in the journal are peer-reviewed scientific papers, case reports, and editorials. The journal also publishes letters to the editor. The objective of the journal is to promote awareness of federal medicine by providing a forum for responsible discussion of common ideas and problems relevant to federal healthcare. Its mission is: To increase healthcare education by providing scientific and other information to its readers; to facilitate communication; and to offer a prestige publication for members’ writings.
期刊最新文献
Best Practices for Storage of Reusable Medical Devices in the Military Health System. Osteopathic Manipulative Treatment for Postconcussive Symptoms: A Case Report. The Association Between Disordered Eating and Musculoskeletal Injury Among Marine Officers Upon Entry to the Basic School. Considerations for Perioperative Management Guidance Regarding GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: Evaluation of Current Practices and Future Directions. Building a Culture of Health Through Leader-Inspired Nutrition.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1