Global PRoMiSe (Perioperative Recommendations for Medication Safety): protocol for a mixed-methods study

Karen C Nanji, Alan Forbes Merry, Sofia D Shaikh, Christina Pagel, Hao Deng, Joyce A Wahr, Adrian W Gelb, Beverley A Orser, Karen C Nanji, Alan Forbes Merry, Sofia D Shaikh, Christina Pagel, Hao Deng, Joyce A Wahr, Adrian W Gelb, Beverley A Orser

Abstract

Introduction: Medication errors (MEs), which occur commonly in the perioperative period, have the potential to cause patient harm or death. Many published recommendations exist for preventing perioperative MEs; however, many of these recommendations conflict and are often not applicable to middle-income and low-income countries. The goal of this study is to develop and disseminate consensus-based recommendations for perioperative medication safety that are tailored to country income level.

Methods and analysis: The primary site of this mixed-methods study is Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School. Participants include a minimum of 108 international medication safety experts, 27 from each of the World Bank's four country income groups (high, upper-middle, lower-middle and low-income). Using the Delphi method, participants will rate the appropriateness of candidate medication safety recommendations by completing online surveys using RedCAP. We will use Condorcet ranking methods to prioritise the final recommendations for each country income group. We will execute a comprehensive dissemination strategy for the recommendations across each country income group. Finally, we will conduct semistructured interviews with our participants to evaluate the initial adoption and implementation of the recommendations in each country income group.

Ethics and dissemination: This study was approved by the Human Research Committee/Institutional Review Board at Partners Healthcare (2019P003567). Findings will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at local and international conferences.

Trial registration number: NCT04240301.

Keywords: adult anaesthesia; health & safety; protocols & guidelines; quality in health care.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: KCN receives author royalties from UpToDate, Inc (Waltham MA). AFM has shares in Safersleep LLC (Auckland, New Zealand) and chairs its Board. JW received speaker honoraria from the Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation (Rochester, Minnesota, USA) and the Aspen Institute (Aspen, Colorado, USA). AWG receives consulting fees from Masimo Inc (Irvine, California, USA) and Haisco Pharmaceutical (Shannan, China). He is also Secretary of the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists (London, UK). BAO serves on the Board of Directors of the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) Canada (Toronto, Canada).

© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Preliminary interview instrument. This will serve as the basis for the final semistructured interview instrument to be used in part 5: evaluation of initial adoption using semistructure interviews. The preliminary instrument will be pilot tested and iteratively revised with our project steering committee, to arrive at the final interview instrument.

References

    1. Merry AF, Webster CS, Hannam J, et al. . Multimodal system designed to reduce errors in recording and administration of drugs in anaesthesia: prospective randomised clinical evaluation. BMJ 2011;343:d5543. 10.1136/bmj.d5543
    1. Nanji KC, Patel A, Shaikh S, et al. . Evaluation of perioperative medication errors and adverse drug events. Anesthesiology 2016;124:25–34. 10.1097/ALN.0000000000000904
    1. Fasting S, Gisvold SE. Adverse drug errors in anesthesia, and the impact of coloured syringe labels. Can J Anaesth 2000;47:1060–7. 10.1007/BF03027956
    1. Cooper JB, Newbower RS, Kitz RJ. An analysis of major errors and equipment failures in anesthesia management: considerations for prevention and detection. Anesthesiology 1984;60:34–42. 10.1097/00000542-198401000-00008
    1. Neily J, Silla ES, Sum-Ping SJT, et al. . Anesthesia adverse events voluntarily reported in the Veterans health administration and lessons learned. Anesth Analg 2018;126:471–7. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002149
    1. Kurth CD, Tyler D, Heitmiller E, et al. . National pediatric anesthesia safety quality improvement program in the United States. Anesth Analg 2014;119:112–21. 10.1213/ANE.0000000000000040
    1. Anesthesiology facts, 2019. Available:
    1. Eichhorn J. APSF hosts medication safety conference. Anesthesia Patient Safety Foundation Newsletter 2010;25:1–20.
    1. Wahr JA, Abernathy JH, Lazarra EH, et al. . Medication safety in the operating room: literature and expert-based recommendations. Br J Anaesth 2017;118:32–43. 10.1093/bja/aew379
    1. Whitaker D, Brattebø G, Trenkler S, et al. . The European board of Anaesthesiology recommendations for safe medication practice: first update. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2017;34:4–7. 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000531
    1. Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Guidelines for the safe management and use of medications in anaesthesia, 2017.
    1. World bank country and lending groups, 2019. Available: [Accessed 24 Sep 2019].
    1. Fitch K, Bernstein SJ, Aguilar MD, et al. . The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method user's manual. RAND Corporation, 2001.
    1. Hinkelbein J, Lamperti M, Akeson J, et al. . European Society of Anaesthesiology and European board of Anaesthesiology guidelines for procedural sedation and analgesia in adults. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2018;35:6–24. 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000683
    1. Mangione-Smith R, DeCristofaro AH, Setodji CM, et al. . The quality of ambulatory care delivered to children in the United States. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1515–23. 10.1056/NEJMsa064637
    1. SooHoo NF, Lieberman JR, Farng E, et al. . Development of quality of care indicators for patients undergoing total hip or total knee replacement. BMJ Qual Saf 2011;20:153–7. 10.1136/bmjqs.2009.032524
    1. World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists Member societies, 2019. Available:
    1. World Health Organization WHO guideline on the use of safety-engineered syringes for intramuscular, intradermal and subcutaneous injections in health care settings. World Health Organization, 2016.
    1. Glasgow RE, Harden SM, Gaglio B, et al. . RE-AIM planning and evaluation framework: adapting to new science and practice with a 20-year review. Front Public Health 2019;7:64. 10.3389/fpubh.2019.00064
    1. Hayes CB, O'Shea MP, Foley-Nolan C, et al. . Barriers and facilitators to adoption, implementation and sustainment of obesity prevention interventions in schoolchildren- a DEDIPAC case study. BMC Public Health 2019;19:198. 10.1186/s12889-018-6368-7
    1. RE-AIM RE-AIM: reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, maintenance, 2019. Available:
    1. Glasgow RE, Vogt TM, Boles SM. Evaluating the public health impact of health promotion interventions: the RE-AIM framework. Am J Public Health 1999;89:1322–7. 10.2105/AJPH.89.9.1322
    1. Pagel C, Brown KL, McLeod I, et al. . Selection by a panel of clinicians and family representatives of important early morbidities associated with paediatric cardiac surgery suitable for routine monitoring using the nominal group technique and a robust voting process. BMJ Open 2017;7:e014743. 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-014743
    1. Utley M, Gallivan S, Mills M, et al. . A consensus process for identifying a prioritised list of study questions. Health Care Manag Sci 2007;10:105–10. 10.1007/s10729-006-9003-6
    1. Young HP. Condorcet's theory of voting. Am Polit Sci Rev 1988;82:1231–44. 10.2307/1961757
    1. Gehrlein WV. Condorcet's paradox. Theory Decis 1983;15:161–97. 10.1007/BF00143070
    1. Borg I, Groenen PJ, Mair P. Applied multidimensional scaling. Springer Science and Business Media, 2012.
    1. Hout MC, Papesh MH, Goldinger SD. Multidimensional scaling. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci 2013;4:93–103. 10.1002/wcs.1203
    1. Mugavin ME. Multidimensional scaling: a brief overview. Nurs Res 2008;57:64–8. 10.1097/01.NNR.0000280659.88760.7c
    1. Mair P, Borg I, Rusch T. Goodness-Of-Fit assessment in multidimensional scaling and unfolding. Multivariate Behav Res 2016;51:772–89. 10.1080/00273171.2016.1235966
    1. Garson GD. Cluster analysis. Asheboro, NC, USA: Statistical Publishing Associates, 2014.
    1. Mirkin B. Clustering: a data recovery approach. Vol 19. Boca Raton, FL, USA: Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2012.
    1. Hanke K, Liu JH, Sibley CG, et al. . "Heroes" and "villains" of world history across cultures. PLoS One 2015;10:e0115641. 10.1371/journal.pone.0115641
    1. van Randeraad-van der Zee CH, Beurskens AJHM, Swinkels RAHM, et al. . The burden of neck pain: its meaning for persons with neck pain and healthcare providers, explored by concept mapping. Qual Life Res 2016;25:1219–25. 10.1007/s11136-015-1149-6
    1. Nowicki EA, Brown JD, Dare L. Educators' evaluations of children's ideas on the social exclusion of classmates with intellectual and learning disabilities. J Appl Res Intellect Disabil 2018;31:e154–63. 10.1111/jar.12356
    1. Greenhalgh T, Robert G, Macfarlane F, et al. . Diffusion of innovations in service organizations: systematic review and recommendations. Milbank Q 2004;82:581–629. 10.1111/j.0887-378X.2004.00325.x
    1. Nanji KC, Rothschild JM, Boehne JJ, et al. . Unrealized potential and residual consequences of electronic prescribing on pharmacy workflow in the outpatient pharmacy. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2014;21:481–6. 10.1136/amiajnl-2013-001839
    1. Ash JS, Sittig DF, Dykstra R, et al. . The unintended consequences of computerized provider order entry: findings from a mixed methods exploration. Int J Med Inform 2009;78:S69–76. 10.1016/j.ijmedinf.2008.07.015
    1. Glaser B, Strauss A. The discovery of grounded theory: strategies for qualitative research. Chicago, IL, USA: Aldine, 1967.
    1. Miles MB, Huberman AM. Qualitative data analysis: an expanded sourcebook. 2 edn Thousand Oaks, CA, USA: Sage Publications, 1994.

Source: PubMed

3
订阅