Cargando…
A room of errors simulation to improve pharmacy operators’ knowledge of cytotoxic drug production
INTRODUCTION: We used an educational healthcare simulation tool called room of errors (ROE) to raise pharmacy operators’ awareness of potential errors in a chemotherapy production process and assessed its impact on their knowledge and satisfaction. METHODS: Twenty-five errors (compiled from internal...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10687806/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36748798 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/10781552231152145 |
Sumario: | INTRODUCTION: We used an educational healthcare simulation tool called room of errors (ROE) to raise pharmacy operators’ awareness of potential errors in a chemotherapy production process and assessed its impact on their knowledge and satisfaction. METHODS: Twenty-five errors (compiled from internal procedures, literature and our hospital's reported incidents) were categorised as static (n = 7, visible by the participant anytime) and dynamic (n = 18, made by a pseudooperator in front of the participant). Our simulated cytotoxic production unit (CPU) hosted the 1 h-simulation. Two pharmacists (supervisor/pseudo-operator) welcomed the trainee for a 10-min briefing. During the 20-min simulation, participants watched the pseudo-operator's gestures in a simulated chemotherapy production process. Participants called out each error observed (recorded by the supervisor). A 20-min debriefing followed. ROE's impact on knowledge was measured through participants’ answers to a before-and after 18-item questionnaire about CPU's procedures and certainty about answers on a scale (0%–100%). Participants evaluated the training using a satisfaction questionnaire (Likert scale, 1–6). RESULTS: The 14 participants detected 70.4% ± 11.4% of errors. Least-detected errors were “using non-disinfected vials” (42.9%) and “touching syringe plunger” (0%). Critical errors (expired leftovers or glucose instead of sodium chloride) were detected at 57.1%. Knowledge improved from 60.3% to 94.1% (p < 0.001) and certainty from 75.3% to 98.8% (p < 0.001). Participants appreciated this non-judgmental, informative, and original training (satisfaction 95.7%). Some pointed out difficulties settling into the game quickly and visualising static and dynamic errors simultaneously. CONCLUSION: This ROE simulation improved operators’ knowledge and certainty. Longer-term testing should be done to measure knowledge retention over time. |
---|