4.7 Article

Preventing Home Medication Administration Errors

期刊

PEDIATRICS
卷 148, 期 6, 页码 -

出版社

AMER ACAD PEDIATRICS
DOI: 10.1542/peds.2021-054666

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Medication administration errors are common in home settings, especially with the use of liquid preparations and complex medication schedules; these errors disproportionately affect children with chronic conditions. Strategies to reduce home medication errors include improving provider prescribing practices, implementing health literacy-informed counseling strategies, reviewing medication lists, provider training, and other measures.
Medication administration errors that take place in the home are common, especially when liquid preparations are used and complex medication schedules with multiple medications are involved; children with chronic conditions are disproportionately affected. Parents and other caregivers with low health literacy and/or limited English proficiency are at higher risk for making errors in administering medications to children in their care. Recommended strategies to reduce home medication errors relate to provider prescribing practices; health literacy-informed verbal counseling strategies (eg, teachback and showback) and written patient education materials (eg, pictographic information) for patients and/or caregivers across settings (inpatient, outpatient, emergency care, pharmacy); dosing-tool provision for liquid medication measurement; review of medication lists with patients and/or caregivers (medication reconciliation) that includes prescription and over-the-counter medications, as well as vitamins and supplements; leveraging the medical home; engaging adolescents and their adult caregivers; training of providers; safe disposal of medications; regulations related to medication dosing tools, labeling, packaging, and informational materials; use of electronic health records and other technologies; and research to identify novel ways to support safe home medication administration.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据