A scoping review protocol for a patient safety error reporting education program for sustainable development: for nursing undergraduate students

The Patient safety error reporting education is very useful in promoting a safety culture in which health care providers learn from error experiences and prevent such problems from being repeated. This scoping review, we will review the literature on error reporting education programs in the nursing undergraduate curriculum, and try to provide basic data for more advanced program development to society in the future. In this review, we will consider studies focused on patient safety error reporting training programs for undergraduate nursing students. We will also focus on the teaching methods and learning strategies applied to such programs. Data extraction will be performed according to the sustainable development education model to show more future-oriented outcomes, and narrative summaries and tabulated results are presented through tables. It will explain how the Patient Safety Error Reporting System training program was designed or implemented.

Nurses’ Perspectives About Reasons for Not Reporting Medical Errors in Educational Hospitals, Ahvaz, Iran

Background: Reporting of medical errors is an approach to identify and prevent errors in hospitals. Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine the barriers to error rError Reporting; Nurse; Hospital; Ahvazeport from the nurses’ viewpoints in Ahvaz Educational hospitals. Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was done on 206 nurses working in educational hospitals of Ahvaz selected by stratified random sampling. The measurement tool used in this study was a researcher-made questionnaire, which its validity was confirmed by content validity, and its reliability using Cronbach’s alpha was calculated to be 0.84. Data collection was performed from April to June 2019. Results: The causes of failure to error reporting included educational, attitudinal, process, structural, and managerial factors. The total mean score of the factors causing non-reporting of errors was 3.88 ± 0.53, which was between 3 and 4 (“important”). Also, educational, attitudinal, and process factors were reported as “very important” for nurses. Structural and managerial factors were rated reported “important” by nurses over 90% of nurses rated educational, attitudinal, and process factors as important and very important, and more than 70% of them rated structural and managerial factors as important and very important. Nurses with different levels of education or work experiences had different scores in reasons for not reporting errors. Conclusions: Some educational, attitudinal, process, structural, and managerial factors were critical reasons for not reporting errors. In order to reduce same errors in the future and promoting health care quality, officials need to develop strategies to remove barriers and consider the reasons for not reporting errors in nurses’ educational programs using team-based and forward-looking approaches, adopting an impersonal and systematic approach, and finally, modifying error reporting rules.

Nurses' Decisions in Error Reporting and Disclosing Based on Error Scenarios: A Mixed-method Study

Background: It is ensured that nurses’ error reporting and disclosing improve services to patients and are considered a movement toward creating a culture of transparency in the healthcare system. Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the nurses' decisions on reporting and disclosing Medical Errors (MEs). Methods: This research followed a mixed-method embedded design that was performed in five hospitals in Iran in 2018. A total of 491 nurses participated in the quantitative phase of the study with stratified sampling, followed by a simple random sampling technique. Also, 22 nurses joined the qualitative phase. Data were collected using a researcher-made questionnaire and semi-structured interviews through a scenario-based method. Quantitative data analysis was performed using descriptive and analytical statistics by SPSS 21.0 and Expert Choice 10.0 software. The qualitative data were analyzed based on the content analysis approach. Results: The most important perceived barriers with the highest impact coincided with educational (57.17%) and motivational (56.77%) factors based on SEM analysis (ES: 1.33, SE: 0.16). Regression analysis showed that error-reporting mechanisms, educational factors, and reporting consequences were significantly associated with age, sex, and work experience (P-Value ≤0.05). Error scenarios were thematized into three categories: Error perception (including ambiguity and weakness in error definition, the severity of the error, unawareness of guidelines, deviation from standards, and untrained staff), error reporting (including ineffective reporting system, hesitation in reporting to a formal system, increased workload, improper reaction, punitive responses, and concerns about consequences), and error disclosure (including no disclosure, partial disclosure, and full disclosure). Conclusions: The obtained results contributed to a better understanding of the barriers to error reporting and disclosing. In addition, these results can help hospitals encourage error reporting and ultimately make organizational changes, which reduce the incidence of errors.

The Effective Strategies to Avoid Medication Errors and Improving Reporting Systems

Background: Population-based studies from several countries have constantly shown excessively high rates of medication errors and avoidable deaths. An efficient medication error reporting system is the backbone of reliable practice and a measure of progress towards achieving safety. Improvement efforts and system changes of medication error reporting systems should be targeted towards reductions in the likelihood of injury to future patients. However, the aim of this review is to provide a summary of medication errors reporting culture, incidence reporting systems, creating effective reporting methods, analysis of medication error reports, and recommendations to improve medication errors reporting systems. Methods: Electronic databases (PubMed, Ovid, EBSCOhost, EMBASE, and ProQuest) were examined from 1 January 1998 to 30 June 2020. 180 articles were found and 60 papers were ultimately included in the review. Data were mined by two reviewers and verified by two other reviewers. The search yielded 684 articles, which were then reduced to 60 after the deletion of duplicates via vetting of titles, abstracts, and full-text papers. Results: Studies were principally from the United States of America and the United Kingdom. Limited studies were from Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Korea, Japan, Greece, France, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt. Detection, measurement, and analysis of medication errors require an active rather than a passive approach. Efforts are needed to encourage medication error reporting, including involving staff in opportunities for improvement and the determination of root cause(s). The National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention taxonomy is a classification system to describe and analyze the details around individual medication error events. Conclusion: A successful medication error reporting program should be safe for the reporter, result in constructive and useful recommendations and effective changes while being inclusive of everyone and supported with required resources. Health organizations need to adopt an effectual reporting environment for the medication use process in order to advance into a sounder practice.