Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do centrally pre-prepared solutions achieve more reliable drug concentrations than solutions prepared on the ward?

  • Original
  • Published:
Intensive Care Medicine Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

To compare the concentration conformity of infusion solutions manually prepared on intensive care units (ICU) with solutions from pharmacy-based, automated production.

Methods

A prospective observational study conducted in a university hospital in Germany. Drug concentrations of 100 standardised infusion solutions manually prepared in the ICU and 100 matching solutions from automated production containing amiodarone, noradrenaline or hydrocortisone were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography analysis. Deviations from stated concentrations were calculated, and the quality of achieved concentration conformity of the two production methods was compared.

Results

Actual concentrations of 53% of the manually prepared and 16% of the machine-made solutions deviated by >5% above or below the stated concentration. A deviation of >10% was measured in 22% of the manually prepared samples and in 5% of samples from automated production. Of the manually prepared solutions, 15% deviated by >15% above or below the intended concentration. The mean concentration of the manually prepared solutions was 97.2% (SD 12.7%, range 45–129%) and of the machine-made solutions was 101.1% (SD 4.3%, range 90–114%) of the target concentration (p < 0.01).

Conclusions

In this preliminary study, ward-based, manually prepared infusion solutions showed clinically relevant deviations in concentration conformity significantly more often than pharmacy-prepared, machine-made solutions. Centralised, automated preparation of standardised infusion solutions may be an effective means to reduce this type of medication error. Further confirmatory studies in larger settings and under conditions of routine automated production are required.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Calabrese AD, Erstad BL, Brandl K, Barletta JF, Kane SL, Sherman DS (2001) Medication administration errors in adult patients in the ICU. Intensive Care Med 27:1592–1598

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Rothschild JM, Landrigan CP, Cronin JW, Kaushal R, Lockley SW, Burdick E, Stone PH, Lilly CM, Katz JT, Czeisler CA, Bates DW (2005) The Critical Care Safety Study: the incidence and nature of adverse events and serious medical errors in intensive care. Crit Care Med 33:1694–1700

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Valentin A, Capuzzo M, Guidet B, Moreno RP, Dolanski L, Bauer P, Metnitz PG (2006) Patient safety in intensive care: results from the multinational Sentinel Events Evaluation (SEE) study. Intensive Care Med 32:1591–1598

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Garrouste-Orgeas M, Timsit JF, Vesin A, Schwebel C, Arnodo P, Lefrant JY, Souweine B, Tabah A, Charpentier J, Gontier O, Fieux F, Mourvillier B, Troché G, Reignier J, Dumay MF, Azoulay E, Reignier B, Carlet J, Soufir L (2010) Selected medical errors in the intensive care unit: results of the IATROREF study: parts I and II. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 181:134–142

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Valentin A, Capuzzo M, Guidet B, Moreno R, Metnitz B, Bauer P, Metnitz PG (2009) Errors in administration of parenteral drugs in intensive care units: multinational prospective study. BMJ 338:b814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Burmester MK, Dionne R, Thiagarajan RR, Laussen PC (2008) Interventions to reduce medication prescribing errors in a paediatric cardiac intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 34:1083–1090

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Tissot E, Cornette C, Demoly P, Jacquet M, Barale F, Capellier G (1999) Medication errors at the administration stage in an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 25:353–359

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Fraind DB, Slagle JM, Tubbesing VA, Hughes SA, Weinger MB (2002) Reengineering intravenous drug and fluid administration processes in the operating room: step one: task analysis of existing processes. Anesthesiology 97:139–147

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fahimi F, Ariapanah P, Faizi M, Shafaghi B, Namdar R, Ardakani MT (2008) Errors in preparation and administration of intravenous medications in the intensive care unit of a teaching hospital an observational study. Aust Crit Care 2:110–116

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Ferner RE, Langford NJ, Anton C, Hutchings A, Bateman DN, Routledge PA (2001) Random and systematic medication errors in routine clinical practice: a multicenter study of infusions, using acetylcysteine as an example. Br J Clin Pharmacol 52:573–577

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Garnerin P, Pellet-Meier B, Chopard P, Perneger T, Bonnabry P (2007) Measuring human-error probabilities in drug preparation: a pilot simulation study. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 63:769–776

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Parshuram CS, To T, Seto W, Trope A, Koren G, Laupacis A (2008) Systematic evaluation of errors occurring during the preparation of intravenous medication. CMAJ 178:42–48

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Ferner RE (2009) The epidemiology of medication errors: the methodological difficulties. Br J Clin Pharmacol 67:614–620

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Allen EM, Van Boerum DH, Olsen AF, Dean JM (1995) Difference between the measured and ordered dose of catecholamine infusions. Ann Pharmacother 29:1095–1100

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Parshuram CS, Ng GY, Ho TK, Klein J, Moore AM, Bohn D, Koren G (2003) Discrepancies between ordered and delivered concentrations of opiate infusions in critical care. Crit Care Med 31:2483–2487

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Wheeler DW, Degnan BA, Sehmi JS, Burnstein RM, Menon DK, Gupta AK (2008) Variability in the concentrations of intravenous drug infusions prepared in a critical care unit. Intensive Care Med 34:1441–1447

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Hassan E, Badawi O, Weber RJ, Cohen H (2010) Using technology to prevent adverse drug events in the ICU. Crit Care Med 38:S97–S105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. The Audit Commission (2001) A spoon full of sugar—medicines management in NHS hospitals. Audit Commission Publications, London, pp 1–79

  19. Hartwick RA, Brown PR (1980) The use of high pressure liquid chromatography in clinical chemistry and biomedical research. Adv Clin Chem 21:25–99

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Franklin BD, Taxis K, Barber N (2009) Parenteral drug errors. Reported error rates are likely to be underestimation. BMJ 338:b1814

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Eckmanns T, Bessert J, Behnke M, Gastmeier P, Ruden H (2006) Compliance with antiseptic hand rub use in intensive care units: the Hawthorne effect. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol 27:931–934

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Moyen E, Camire E, Stelfox HAT (2008) Clinical review: medication errors in critical care. Crit Care 12:208

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

This study was investigator initiated and funded by the Pharmacy of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf. No other sponsoring was obtained.

Conflict of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Pharmacy of the University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    Carola Dehmel, Michael Baehr, Claudia Langebrake & Heike Hilgarth

  2. Department of Intensive Care Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistrasse 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany

    Stephan A. Braune, Georg Kreymann, Axel Nierhaus & Stefan Kluge

  3. Baxter Healthcare, Deerfield, USA

    Georg Kreymann

  4. Department of Stem Cell Transplantation, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    Claudia Langebrake

  5. Institute of Pharmacy, University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany

    Dorothee C. Dartsch

Authors
  1. Carola Dehmel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Stephan A. Braune
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Georg Kreymann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Michael Baehr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Claudia Langebrake
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Heike Hilgarth
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Axel Nierhaus
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Dorothee C. Dartsch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Stefan Kluge
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Stephan A. Braune.

Additional information

C. Dehmel and S. A. Braune contributed equally to this article.

D.C. Dartsch and S. Kluge conceived the study equally as senior authors.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dehmel, C., Braune, S.A., Kreymann, G. et al. Do centrally pre-prepared solutions achieve more reliable drug concentrations than solutions prepared on the ward?. Intensive Care Med 37, 1311–1316 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-011-2230-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00134-011-2230-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation