2017
DOI: 10.5897/ajpp2017.4799
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Medication incidents related to feeding tube: A cross-sectional study

Abstract: The aim is to evaluate the medication incidents relating to incorrect oral medication preparation and administration through enteral feeding tubes in hospitalized patients. A cross-sectional design was used to observe 374 doses of medications at three Brazilian hospitals. The patients consisted mostly of females (48.6%), elderly (65.71%), using polyurethane tubes (82.9%), with jejunal access (82.9%), and circulatory system diseases (45.71%). The most common medication incidents identified were: mixing tablets … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
10
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(10 citation statements)
references
References 15 publications
0
10
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, 38.7% were confused at the time of the AE. Another common cause of inadvertent feeding tube removal is tube obstruction [7,32,33]. In this study, this event was responsible for 13.1% of all NGT/NET-related AEs.…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 60%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, 38.7% were confused at the time of the AE. Another common cause of inadvertent feeding tube removal is tube obstruction [7,32,33]. In this study, this event was responsible for 13.1% of all NGT/NET-related AEs.…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 60%
“…According to the literature, the rates related to tube obstruction vary from 12.5 to 45.0%. The event may be caused by mixing different medications together, failure to crush simple compressed tablets to a fine powder, failure to administer each medication separately, failure to wash the tube with at least 15 ml of water before and after medication administration, and failure to pause the enteral nutrition during medication administration [7,33,34]. Some interventions are proposed to reduce the risk of tube obstruction and include: policies and procedures to ensure safe practices by healthcare teams; review by a pharmacist of each medication order to determine whether the enterally administered medication will be safe; and the institution and following of nursing policies and procedures to safely prepare and administer medications [7].…”
Section: Plos Onementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Tube obstruction is a frequent complication that can be caused by inadequate preparation of drugs for administration, in addition to contraindications related to pharmaceutical formulations. 3 A retrospective study analyzed that 34.7% of the medications prescribed by enteral route could have been replaced to reduce the risk of tube obstruction. 20 The pharmaceutical interventions performed in this scenario are extremely important considering the implications that can be caused by the non-recommendation of administration, ensuring the correct selection of pharmaceutical forms and the most adequate route of administration.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It can occur due to the viscosity and pH of the solution formed after crushing, to the excipients of the medication, to the non-pause of enteral nutrition before the administration of medications, to the mixture of various crushed oral solids for administration or to the improper hygiene of the tube before and after administration. 3 The reinsertion of a new tube implies discomfort for the patient, in addition to additional costs with materials and radiological exams to confirm its position. 4 Some solid oral medications have a highly technical formulation matrix, produced to guarantee a controlled release time in the organism.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In a survey conducted in 2014 across three Brazilian hospitals, errors were identified in the preparation and administration of medications via nasoenteral tubes. One of these institutions was selected for a QIP to address these issues (baseline—2014) 7. Between 2015 and 2017,8 9 PDSA cycles were conducted to evaluate the processes.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%