Development and Evaluation of an Intravenous Infusion Sequence Annotation SystemFunding The project was supported by the Key Research and Development Plan Project of Anhui Science and Technology Department (No.1804h08020276).
Objectives The sequence of intravenous infusions may impact the efficacy, safety, and cost of intravenous medications. The study describes and assesses a computerized clinical decision support annotation system capable of analyzing the sequence of intravenous infusions.
Methods All intravenous medications on the hospital formulary were analyzed based on factors that impact intravenous infusion sequence. Eight pharmacy infusion knowledge databases were constructed based on Hospital Infusion Standards. These databases were incorporated into the computerized sequence annotation module within the electronic health record system. The annotation process was changed from pharmacists' manual annotation (phase 1) to computer-aided pharmacist manual annotation (phase 2) to automated computer annotation (phase 3).
Results Comparing phase 2 to phase 1, there were significant differences in sequence annotation with regards to the percentage of hospital wards annotated (100% vs. 4.65%, chi-square = 180.95, p < 0.001), percentage of patients annotated (64.18% vs. 0.52%, chi-square = 90.46, p < 0.001), percentage of intravenous orders annotated (75.67% vs. 0.77%, chi-square = 118.78, p < 0.001), and the number of tubing flushes per ward per day (118.51 vs. 2,115.00, p < 0.001). Compared with phase 1, there were significant cost savings in tubing flushes in phase 2 and phase 3. Compared with phase 1, there was significant difference in the time nurses spent on tubing flushes in phase 2 and phase 3 (1,244.94 vs. 21,684.8 minutes, p < 0.001; 1,369.51 vs. 21,684.8 minutes, p < 0.001). Compared with phase 1, significantly less time was required for pharmacist annotation in phase 2 and phase 3 (90.6 vs. 4,753.57 minutes, p < 0.001; 0.05 vs. 4,753.57 minutes, p < 0.001).
Conclusion A computerized infusion annotation system is efficient in sequence annotation and significant savings in tubing flushes can be achieved as a result.
Keywordspharmacy - pharmacy information systems - computer-assisted decision-making - knowledge modeling and representation - safety
Protection of Human and Animal Subjects
No human or animal subjects were included in this project. Our study was reviewed by our institutional IRB and deemed exempt.
Received: 22 August 2020
Accepted: 09 December 2020
03 February 2021 (online)
© 2021. Thieme. All rights reserved.
Georg Thieme Verlag KG
Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
- 1 Zeng S, Wang D, Yan Y. et al. Single-center analysis of the potential inappropriate use of intravenous medications in hospitalized patients in china. Clin Ther 2019; 41 (08) 1631-1637
- 2 Wang H, Xie X, Liu Z. et al. Evaluation of the inpatient usage of intravenous infusion in 156 hospitals. J Pharm Pract 2017; 35 (06) 573-576
- 3 Sutherland A, Canobbio M, Clarke J, Randall M, Skelland T, Weston E. Incidence and prevalence of intravenous medication errors in the UK: a systematic review. Eur J Hosp Pharm Sci Pract 2020; 27 (01) 3-8
- 4 Wu YP, Yan Q, Zhang J. Training instructions for national pharmacy intravenous admixture service operation model & inspections management. Beijing: Scientific and Technology Documentation Press; 2016: 33
- 5 Yang Y, Wang J, Ding H. et al. Analysis on the causes of clinical return of PIVAS finished infusions in our hospital and discussion on intervention strategies. China Pharm 2017; 28 (34) 4894-4896
- 6 Li R, Ren M, Zeng J. et al. Discoloration of compatibility between cefotaxime sodium and ornidazole sodium chloride injection. Chin J Pharmacov 2013; 10 (04) 247-248
- 7 Mancini R, Modlin J. Chemotherapy administration sequence: a review of the literature and creation of a sequencing chart. J Hematol Oncol Pharm 2011; 1 (01) 17-25
- 8 Sauerland C, Engelking C, Wickham R. et al. Vesicant extravasation part I: mechanisms, pathogenesis, and nursing care to reduce risk. Oncol Nur Forum 2006; 33: 1134-1141
- 9 Scherholz ML, Schlesinger N, Androulakis IP. Chronopharmacology of glucocorticoids. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 2019; 151-152: 245-261
- 10 Zeng S, Wang D, Liu W. et al. Overuse of intravenous infusions in China: focusing on management platform and cultural problems. Int J Clin Pharm 2019; 41 (05) 1133-1137
- 11 Ogawa H, Amano H, Maki H. et al. An updated and more accurate drip infusion solution monitoring system - biomed 2013. Biomed Sci Instrum 2013; 49: 74-79
- 12 Amano H, Ogawa H, Maki H, Tsukamoto S, Yonezawa Y, Caldwell WM. A remote drip infusion monitoring system employing Bluetooth. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc 2012; 2012: 2029-2032
- 13 The New Edition of Pharmacology. (17th edition). Accessed April 14, 2020 at: http://www.cpa.org.cn/index.php?do=info&cid=74147
- 14 Wang C, Wu W, Lv Q. Role of clinical pharmacists participating in rational use of antitumor drugs at PIVAS. Shanghai Med Pharm J. 2017; 38 (07) 65-71
- 15 Howlett MM, Butler E, Lavelle KM, Cleary BJ, Breatnach CV. The impact of technology on prescribing errors in pediatric intensive care: a before and after study. Appl Clin Inform 2020; 11 (02) 323-335
- 16 Kirkendall ES, Kouril M, Minich T, Spooner SA. Analysis of electronic medication orders with large overdoses: opportunities for mitigating dosing errors. Appl Clin Inform 2014; 5 (01) 25-45
- 17 Lehmann CU, Conner KG, Cox JM. Preventing provider errors: online total parenteral nutrition calculator. Pediatrics 2004; 113 (04) 748-753