Antibiotic prophylaxis for caesarean section: exchanging one risk for another?

A reply

“…We thank Drs Jain and Gandhi for their interest in our study [1] and would like to provide some additional information to clarify the methodology. Patients received rocuronium as a single intravenous bolus (0.6 mg.kg…”

“…The potential for confusing syringes of induction agent and antibiotic will finally be eliminated with propofol. Coloured drug labels and prefilled syringesanother mistake waiting to happen I was very interested to read the letters by Marr et al [1] and Muddanna et al [2] on colourcoding and labelling of anaesthetic drugs.…”

Antibiotics, caesarean section and human error

“…We can thus minimise, but never eliminate, the potential for human error. A reply I thank Drs Misra and Curtis for their interest in our letter [1], and for correctly pointing out that our drug error was due to human error. Our department has introduced changes in an attempt to minimise this risk in the future.…”

“…Marr et al [1] describe the accidental administration of thiopental instead of co-amoxiclav, necessitating a caesarean section. They suggest that the error occurred due to a recent change in practice whereby antibiotic prophylaxis for caesarean section is administered pre-incision as opposed to post-delivery, and question whether they have been too hasty to change their practice.…”

“…I read with interest the correspondence from Marr et al [1] regarding their recent drug error, which they attribute to a change in protocol requiring administration of prophylactic antibiotics before surgical incision. The error they describe continues to be the commonest drug error in obstetric anaesthetic practice in the UK [2].…”