RSS-Feed abonnieren

DOI: 10.1055/s-0045-1811575
Learning from Errors and Mishaps: An Audit of Hospital Morbidity Events from a Medical Oncology Unit

Abstract
Introduction
Morbidity, an unwanted and often preventable event, is an integral part of cancer treatment. Various morbidity events can contribute to significant toxicities and delay treatment. We intend to describe a novel morbidity data collection methodology to identify all possible morbidity events, learn from mishaps, and improve internal standards to prevent future occurrences.
Objective
This article aims to understand the various morbidity events occurring during chemotherapy among patients undergoing treatment in the medical oncology unit.
Materials and Methods
Data were collected from January 2019 to March 2020 from the department of medical oncology of a tertiary cancer center. The treating team notified the morbidity events via a closed WhatsApp group. These events were prospectively recorded by a nurse who updated various events from all work areas in a defined Excel sheet.
Results
A total of 2,551 patients were registered for treatment from January 2019 to March 2020. A total of 864 morbidity events were recorded: 423 (48%) catheter-related events, 54 (6%) medical errors, 45 (5%) transfusion reactions, 210 (25%) miscellaneous morbidity events, and 31 (3%) unknown events. The median age was 26 years (1–70), with the majority of the events seen among adolescent young adult patients, 422 (48.9%). Catheter-related events were found in the majority, with central line–associated bloodstream infection being one of the significant causes of morbidity and catheter removal (13.3%). Hence, a catheter maintenance team was introduced. Catheter maintenance was successful in 36.8% (117/426).
Conclusion
A structured, uniform, and prospective record of the morbidity events during treatment is essential to understanding errors, which can provide an opportunity to rectify future events. The periodic audit of events can help in establishing standardized operating procedures to minimize error and maximize safety.
Key message
Morbidity event definitions and recognition plus reporting are essential to understand and prevent future events.
-
What is already known: Mishaps and side effects occur concurrently with any patient care or treatment.
-
What this study adds: Novel method of data collection and reporting from all key areas of work, uniform definitions, and systematic categorization of events with emphasis on near and never miss events.
-
How this study might affect research practice or policy: Will enlighten on the major morbidity events possible and ways to prevent. Important teamwork and novel data collection methodology.
Keywords
morbidity - chemotherapy-related toxicity - central line-associated bloodstream infection - transfusion reactionData availability Statement
Data are available on request from the corresponding author.
Patients' Consent
Patient consent is not applicable. Waiver of consent is obtained from IEC, Jawaharlal Institute of Postgraduate Medical Education and Research.
Publikationsverlauf
Artikel online veröffentlicht:
08. September 2025
© 2025. The Author(s). This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, permitting unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction so long as the original work is properly cited. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Pvt. Ltd.
A-12, 2nd Floor, Sector 2, Noida-201301 UP, India
-
References
- 1 Zaoutis LB, Chiang VW. Comprehensive Pediatric Hospital Medicine. 2nd ed.. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Medical; 2007
- 2 Mathaiyan J, Jain T, Dubashi B, Batmanabane G. Prescription, transcription and administration errors in out-patient day care unit of a regional cancer centre in South India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2016; 17 (05) 2611-2617
- 3 Morano SG, Coppola L, Latagliata R. et al. Early and late complications related to central venous catheters in hematological malignancies: a retrospective analysis of 1102 patients. Mediterr J Hematol Infect Dis 2014; 6 (01) e2014011
- 4 Kim HJ, Yun J, Kim HJ. et al. Safety and effectiveness of central venous catheterization in patients with cancer: prospective observational study. J Korean Med Sci 2010; 25 (12) 1748-1753
- 5 Hentrich M, Schalk E, Schmidt-Hieber M. et al; Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology. Central venous catheter-related infections in hematology and oncology: 2012 updated guidelines on diagnosis, management and prevention by the Infectious Diseases Working Party of the German Society of Hematology and Medical Oncology. Ann Oncol 2014; 25 (05) 936-947
- 6 Saha S, Krishna D, Prasath R, Sachan D. Incidence and analysis of 7 years adverse transfusion reaction: a retrospective analysis. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus 2020; 36 (01) 149-155
- 7 Baier C, Linke L, Eder M. et al. Incidence, risk factors and healthcare costs of central line-associated nosocomial bloodstream infections in hematologic and oncologic patients. PLoS One 2020; 15 (01) e0227772
- 8 Ashokkumar R, Srinivasamurthy S, Kelly JJ, Howard SC, Parasuraman S, Uppugunduri CRS. Frequency of chemotherapy medication errors: a systematic review. J Pharmacol Pharmacother 2018; 9: 86-91
- 9 Hwang JL, Weiss RE. Steroid-induced diabetes: a clinical and molecular approach to understanding and treatment. Diabetes Metab Res Rev 2014; 30 (02) 96-102
- 10 Zaremba A, Kramer R, De Temple V. et al. Grade 4 neutropenia secondary to immune checkpoint inhibition - a descriptive observational retrospective multicenter analysis. Front Oncol 2021; 11: 765608
- 11 Cortijo-Cascajares S, Jiménez-Cerezo MJ, Herreros de Tejada A. Review of hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents. Farm Hosp 2012; 36 (03) 148-158
- 12 Alharbi W, Cleland J, Morrison Z. Addressing medication errors in an adult oncology department in Saudi Arabia: a qualitative study. Saudi Pharm J 2019; 27 (05) 650-654
- 13 Schlichtig K, Dürr P, Dörje F, Fromm MF. Medication errors during treatment with new oral anticancer agents: consequences for clinical practice based on the AMBORA study. Clin Pharmacol Ther 2021; 110 (04) 1075-1086
- 14 Ulas A, Silay K, Akinci S. et al. Medication errors in chemotherapy preparation and administration: a survey conducted among oncology nurses in Turkey. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2015; 16 (05) 1699-1705
- 15 Kane MP, Fessele K, Gordilis-Perez J. et al. Medication safety in cancer clinical trials: an analysis of medication error reports at a comprehensive cancer center. JCO 2007; 25 (18) 6547-6547
- 16 Lennes IT, Bohlen N, Park ER, Mort E, Burke D, Ryan DP. Chemotherapy errors: a call for a standardized approach to measurement and reporting. J Oncol Pract 2016; 12 (04) e495-e501
- 17 Bassi R, Aggarwal S, Bhardwaj K, Thakur KK. Patterns of adverse transfusion reactions in a tertiary care centre of North India: a step towards hemovigilance. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus 2017; 33 (02) 248-253
- 18 Sharma DK, Datta S, Gupta A. Study of acute transfusion reactions in a teaching hospital of Sikkim: a hemovigilance initiative. Indian J Pharmacol 2015; 47 (04) 370-374
- 19 Philip J, Pawar A, Chatterjee T, Mallhi RS, Biswas AK, Dimri U. Non infectious complications related to blood transfusion: an 11 year retrospective analysis in a tertiary care hospital. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus 2016; 32 (03) 292-298
- 20 Pahuja S, Puri V, Mahajan G, Gupta P, Jain M. Reporting adverse transfusion reactions: a retrospective study from tertiary care hospital from New Delhi, India. Asian J Transfus Sci 2017; 11 (01) 6-12