IV Smart Pumps: Human Factors Considerations KAREN K. GIULIANO, PHD, RN, FAAN POSTDOCTORAL FELLOW YALE SCHOOL OF NURSING Disclosures I am currently a postdoctoral fellow at Yale University, studying in the area of IV infusion device safety from a human factors perspective at the schools of nursing and engineering I am a former consultant/employee of Ivenix Drug error reduction system (DERS) The implementation of IV Smart pumps with drug libraries and DERS (1997) lead to a quantum leap in IV medication infusion safety There are numerous examples in the literature that support improved safety with the use of DERS However, even with the availability of smart pumps with DERS, serious and frequent errors continue to occur The fundamental question Will the intended users of this medical device: be able to use it with this user interface and these accessories after receiving this training within these use environments to achieve these results Ron Kaye &Jay Crowley (2000). Medical Device Use-Safety: Incorporating Human Factors Engineering into Risk Management. The reality of programming The delivery of a single dose of medication generally involves 10 to 15 steps, each of which introduces an opportunity for error Although some programming automation exists, the vast majority of smart pump programming is still completely manual For nurses, this often results in a clinical conundrum because in too many cases, appropriate and timely medication administration is literally a matter of life and death What does the process look like? The complexity of IV medication administration creates a scenario that demands close attention to detail and relies heavily on human intervention to detect and mitigate errors Pre-op set-up The clinician at the point of care, most often a nurse, is accountable for the final step of ensuring that the correct IV medication or infusion is being delivered. Manual programming within DERS There is no ability for smart pumps to detect a dosing error that falls within the recommended infusion dosing Even when the dosage isn’t correct for the patient to which the medication is being administered This is where current smart pump technology falls particularly short Infusion devices account for up to 35% of all medication errors that result in significant harm National Quality Forum. Critical paths for creating data platforms: patient safety: intravenous infusion pump devices. http://www.qualityforum.org/Publications/2012/10/Critical_Paths_for_Creating_Data_Platforms__Patient_Safety__Intravenous_Inf usion_Pump_Devices.aspx.; McAlearney, AS, Scheck A, Vrontos J, et al. Strategic workarounds to accommodate new technology: the case of smart pumps in hospital care. J Patient Saf. 2007;3(2):75-81. Adverse drug events The majority of adverse drug events are related to various aspects of incorrect programming (NQF, 2012). Incorrectly entering (or selecting from menus of) drug names, doses/concentrations, rates, and drug administration duration times (Keohane, Hayes, & Saniuk, 2005); Bypassing the drug library, either accidentally or intentionally (Rothschild, 2005) Time & interruption Interruption frequency observed during nurses' medication administration tasks ranges from 0.8 to 41.8 events per hour The severity of medication errors increases with the frequency of interruption Common sources of error Overriding of dose error alerts Using basic programming to bypass the smart pump’s drug libraries and dose error reduction systems (DERS) completely Biron, A. D., Loiselle, C. G., & Lavoie-Tremblay, M. (2009). Work interruptions and their contribution to medication administration errors: An evidence review. Worldviews on Evidence-Based Nursing, 6(2), 70-86. Westbrook, J. I., Coiera, E., Dunsmuir, W. T. M., Brown, B. M., Kelk, N., Paoloni, R., & Tran, C. (2010). The impact of interruptions on clinical task completion. Quality & Safety in Health Care, 19(4), 284-289. User study on programming: nursing sample Variable Nursing experience (years) Critical care experience (years) Number of hospital beds Mean 17 12.3 316 Number of critical care beds 34 Length of time using any IV Smart Pump (years) 7.8 Length of time using current IV Smart Pump (years) 7.3 Programming tasks 1. Change the rate on a running infusion 2. Deliver an antibiotic as a secondary infusion 3. Deliver a weight-based infusion 4. Titrate a weight-based infusion 5. Deliver a Morphine infusion with a bolus Differences across the 3 devices Mean Programming Time (in seconds) 90 85.7 80 70 59.6 60 54 49.3 50 36.6 40 30 27.5 24.8 20 10 49.3 27 13.9 8.1 3.3 6.5 16.1 5.2 0 Task 1: Titrate a running infusion Task 2: Deliver an antibiotic as a secondary Task 3: Deliver a Task 4: Titrate a Task 5: Deliver a weight-based infusion weight-based infusion morphine infusion with a bolus Pump A Pump B Pump C Use errors Use error: defined as incorrect final programming Percent (based on total opportunities for error) Pump A Pump B Pump C 7.5% 2.9% 1.33% The environment of care Improved clinical processes and changes in workflow could help to address some of the problems that contribute to IV medication infusion errors Incorrect Mental The clinical decisions computation error time it takes to program Interruptions process during the medication administration The role of technology Many of the fundamental issues will need to be addressed through innovation and the development of new technology We need a simplified user interface Overall, other known deficits in the technology must be improved Keystroke errors due to system complexity The time it takes to program Use errors related to the infusion device interface Giuliano, KK & Niemi, C (2015). The urgent need for innovation in I.V. smart pumps. Nursing Management, 46(3):179. doi: 10.1097/01.NUMA.0000461066.79777.06. Dr. Rory Jaffe March 12, 2015 “People attempting to do things correctly in a broken system” The value of human factors design It is essential that IV infusion pumps are able to adapt to the clinical environment versus requiring the environment to adapt to the pumps
© Copyright 2026 Paperzz