Skip Navigation


International Journal for Quality in Health Care Advance Access originally published online on November 7, 2005
International Journal for Quality in Health Care 2006 18(1):9-16; doi:10.1093/intqhc/mzi082
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
18/1/9    most recent
mzi082v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Bonnabry, P.
Right arrow Articles by Mach, N.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Bonnabry, P.
Right arrow Articles by Mach, N.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

International Journal for Quality in Health Care vol. 18 no. 1 © The Author 2005. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of International Society for Quality in Health Care; all rights reserved

Use of a prospective risk analysis method to improve the safety of the cancer chemotherapy process

Pascal Bonnabry1, Laurence Cingria1, Monique Ackermann1, Farshid Sadeghipour1, Lucienne Bigler2 and Nicolas Mach2

1 Pharmacy and 2 Oncology, University Hospitals, Geneva, Switzerland

Objective. To perform a risk analysis of the cancer chemotherapy process, by comparing five different organizations. To quantitatively demonstrate the usefulness of centralization and information technologies, to identify residual risks that may be the target of additional actions.

Study design. A reengineering of the process started in 1999 and was planned to be finished in 2006. The analysis was performed after the centralization and at the beginning of information technologies integration.

Setting. Two thousand two hundred beds university hospital, with medical, surgical, haematological, gynaecological, geriatric, paediatric oncological departments. Twelve thousand cancer chemotherapies each year.

Methods. According to the failure modes, effects and criticality analysis (FMECA) method, the failure modes were defined and their criticality indexes were calculated on the basis of the likelihood of occurrence, the potential severity for the patients, and the detection probability. Criticality indexes were compared and the acceptability of residual risks was evaluated.

Results. The sum of criticality indexes of 27 identified failure modes was 3596 for the decentralized phase, 2682 for centralization, 2385 for electronic prescription, 2081 for electronic production control, and 1824 for bedside scanning (49% global reduction). The greatest improvements concerned the risk of errors in the production protocols (by a factor of 48), followed by readability problems during transmission (14) and product/dose errors during the production (8). Among the six criticality indexes remaining superior to 100 in the final process, two were judged to be acceptable, whereas further improvements were planned for the four others.

Conclusions. Centralization to the pharmacy was associated with a strong improvement but additional developments involving information technologies also contributed to a major risk reduction. A cost-effect analysis confirmed the pertinence of all developments, as the cost per gained criticality point remained stable all over the different phases.

Keywords: proactive, prospective, risk assessment, FMECA, failure mode, cost-effect analysis, cancer chemotherapy, information technologies

Address reprint requests to Pascal Bonnabry, Pharmacy, University Hospitals, Rue Micheli-du-Crest 24, 1211 Geneva 14, Swit zerland. E-mail: pascal.bonnabry{at}hcuge.ch

Accepted for publication September 10, 2005.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Int J Qual Health CareHome page
M. Kessels-Habraken, T. Van der Schaaf, J. De Jonge, C. Rutte, and K. Kerkvliet
Integration of prospective and retrospective methods for risk analysis in hospitals
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, December 1, 2009; 21(6): 427 - 432.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
J. O. Jacobson, M. Polovich, K. K. McNiff, K. B. LeFebvre, C. Cummings, M. Galioto, K. R. Bonelli, and M. R. McCorkle
American Society of Clinical Oncology/Oncology Nursing Society Chemotherapy Administration Safety Standards
J. Clin. Oncol., November 10, 2009; 27(32): 5469 - 5475.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Health Syst PharmHome page
R. Shane
Current status of administration of medicines
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., March 1, 2009; 66(5_Supplement_3): s42 - s48.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Int J Qual Health CareHome page
B. Bonan, N. Martelli, M. Berhoune, M.-L. Maestroni, L. Havard, and P. Prognon
The application of hazard analysis and critical control points and risk management in the preparation of anti-cancer drugs
Int. J. Qual. Health Care, February 1, 2009; 21(1): 44 - 50.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc.Home page
P. Bonnabry, C. Despont-Gros, D. Grauser, P. Casez, M. Despond, D. Pugin, C. Rivara-Mangeat, M. Koch, M. Vial, A. Iten, et al.
A Risk Analysis Method to Evaluate the Impact of a Computerized Provider Order Entry System on Patient Safety
J. Am. Med. Inform. Assoc., July 1, 2008; 15(4): 453 - 460.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch Pediatr Adolesc MedHome page
G. R. Kim, A. R. Chen, R. J. Arceci, S. H. Mitchell, K. M. Kokoszka, D. Daniel, and C. U. Lehmann
Error Reduction in Pediatric Chemotherapy: Computerized Order Entry and Failure Modes and Effects Analysis
Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med, May 1, 2006; 160(5): 495 - 498.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.