Krisanne Graves

Tubing Misconnections Normalization of Deviance

BACKGROUND Accidental connection of an enteral system to an intravenous (IV) system frequently results in the death of the patient. Misconnections are commonly attributed to the presence of universal connectors found in the majority of patient care tubing systems. Universal connectors allow for tubing misconnections between physiologically incompatible systems. METHODS The purpose of this review of case studies of tubing misconnections and of current expert recommendations for safe tubing connections was to answer the following questions: In tubing connections that have the potential for misconnections between enteral and IV tubing, what are the threats to safety? What are patient outcomes following misconnections between enteral and IV tubing? What are the current recommendations for preventing misconnections between enteral and IV tubing? Following an extensive literature search and guided by 2 models of threats and errors, the authors analyzed case studies and expert opinions to identify technical, organizational, and human errors; patient-related threats; patient outcomes; and recommendations. RESULTS A total of 116 case studies were found in 34 publications. Each involved misconnections of tubes carrying feedings, intended for enteral routes, to IV lines. Overwhelmingly, the recommendations were for redesign to eliminate universal connectors and prevent misconnections. Other recommendations were made, but the analysis indicates they would not prevent all misconnections. CONCLUSIONS This review of the published case studies and current expert recommendations supports a redesign of connectors to ensure incompatibility between enteral and IV systems. Despite the cumulative evidence, little progress has been made to safeguard patients from tubing misconnections.

Cause-and-effect Mapping of Critical Events

Health care errors are routinely reported in the scientific and public press and have become a major concern for most Americans. In learning to identify and analyze errors health care can develop some of the skills of a learning organization, including the concept of systems thinking. Modern experts in improving quality have been working in other high-risk industries since the 1920s making structured organizational changes through various frameworks for quality methods including continuous quality improvement and total quality management. When using these tools, it is important to understand systems thinking and the concept of processes within organization. Within these frameworks of improvement, several tools can be used in the analysis of errors. This article introduces a robust tool with a broad analytical view consistent with systems thinking, called CauseMapping (ThinkReliability, Houston, TX, USA), which can be used to systematically analyze the process and the problem at the same time.