The categories from the analysis were arranged according to the MTO concept and showed that medication management – particularly the administration of drugs – was perilous in nursing homes. The informants gave many examples of when safety was insufficient (Fig. 1). The informants expressed that mistakes in the administration of medication were not only dependent on the individual but also on the working conditions. Furthermore, deficiencies were found in the tools to facilitate and secure the process. In the interviews, it became clear that medication management errors are complex and there is generally no simple explanation for the mistakes that are made. Non-licensed staff with delegation do not always make the necessary checks in conjunction with drug delivery, a delay in care work was told to be the reason behind some of the mistakes. Registered nurses and non-licensed staff work with different regulations and with different systems of documentation, which sometimes make communication and collaboration problematic. The registered nurses are not the managers of the non-licensed staff, which was emphasized as a contributing factor for mistakes. Each category in the text is reinforced with statements from the informants, for example, first-line registered nurses (FRN), registered nurses (RN) and non-licensed staff (NS).
Man – The human factor
All the informants emphasized the human factor as a reason for mistakes in medication management. The so-called human factor has several dimensions, and it can go wrong because health or social care workers act wrongly when conditions fail or when they lack skills. Another factor can be a lack of communication. Categories belonging to the Man concept of the MTO model are presented below.
Lack of competence and experience
All the informants expressed the need for a more comprehensive delegation training program that provides sufficient knowledge to enable delegated NS to handle drug administration, not only in a correct manner but also from a safety perspectiv. The informants’ opinion was that discussions about drug administration issues and consequences were lacking in the training program to obtain delegation. The FRN and RN agreed that the technical part was adequate but emphasized the lack of knowledge of how anatomy and physiology relates to pharmacodynamics and furthermore of diseases caused by medication. If the NS do not understand and interpret the well-being of the patients in relation to treatment, it could jeopardize the caretaker’s health. The RNs considered this aspect important and expressed that this content should be included in a training program to certify that NS conduct safer assessments. Even though the RN is responsible, the NS must assess the risks when administering drugs. All the informants emphasized that reasoning about risks related to drug administration must be added to a training program.
“If the caregiver becomes dizzy or feels ill, gets a rash, or whatever, it is not obvious that the care staff relate these symptoms to drug treatment because their task is to look at the prescription list, hand over the drug and sign” (FRN 2)
Unclear cooperation and communication
Insecurity about the cooperation of the different aspects of drug management in nursing homes emerged. There was an agreement on the RNs responsibility to pass on knowledge, and the responsibility for NS to ask for help when needed. However, RNs were unsure of whether the NS communicated a need for help or if they had other questions about specific drugs that were never asked for. The NS also emphasized that, even though they belonged to the same organization, they did not always communicate or co-operate with each other. Mistakes were made when handing over drugs because there were misunderstandings about whether drugs had been administered or not, or confusion about who should do what within the team:
“It is my responsibility to provide an awareness of what it means to have a delegation and to hand over drugs from a safety perspective. But then, it is the delegate's responsibility to complete what they have learned.” (RN 4)
Unprofessional approach
Carelessness, difficulties in understanding responsibility issues, and not taking the task of delegation seriously were subject areas that were ventilated. Even though knowledge was available, a professional approach could be lacking. It emerged that NS sometimes did not control dosages on drug lists and chose the wrong drug from the pill organizer. It also happened that tablets disappeared and that someone later found them in the caretaker’s room. Errors were made even though NS are trained to safely hand over drugs and are informed about the importance of a written sign that shows that the drugs were administered. Informants confirmed that not controlling the number of tablets against the prescription was the most common fault. An already-administered drug could be offered to the residents when no controls were made. Changes in prescriptions were not noted, and previous prescriptions were taken for granted. The risk was even greater if NS relied on themselves to remember prescriptions or when colleagues were trusted with newly prescribed drugs without any supervision. In addition, the RN also admitted that they made mistakes. They sometimes forgot to write down new drugs on the signing list or else wrote it carelessly so that it was difficult to interpret.
“When you go to the same caretaker day in and day out, the drug handling becomes a routine – because you know how many tablets the care taker should have, and then it almost goes by itself. You have the prescription list in mind.” (NS 1)
Technology – tools and substitutes
A drug prescription ought to be a living document that must be communicated, updated, and reviewed regularly; however, that is not always the case. Replacement drugs are not the main issue, but the many different products may lead to difficulties in finding the correctly prescribed drug, especially if one has to read the small print on many different drug labels. The following categories outline how the administration of medicine can become hazardous and are presented below.
Incomprehensible prescription documents
After introducing a new type of prescription cards, reported mistakes due to a misreading of the cards increased. The prescription cards may contain information about prescriptions from several physicians with several different prescription dates. There may also be more than one prescription card for each caretaker. Informants stressed that handwritten changes on cards could be unclear, and they were especially critical of when temporary drugs were prescribed or discontinued. FRNs as well as NS noted that it is the RNs obligation to make sure that the prescription cards are legible. When cards are unclear, the RN must rewrite the prescriptions, but by this action, there may be a risk for misspelling. Another hazard that was emphasized was when caretakers had two medication systems, the pill organizer and Apo dose (management of drugs by a pharmacy), and the NS only identified one of the medication systems.
“If a drug has been deleted, we have to read in many places to check that the drug really is removed. Sometimes it can be a bit tricky if you are not experienced in reading the prescription list.” (NS 7)
Replacements drugs
The informants emphasized that incidents regarding replacement drugs became more and more common after a new legislation of pharmaceutical benefits in 2002 was introduced. One generic drug substance may have many different product names, which makes it especially difficult when the residents have temporary prescriptions or when they have been recently discharged from hospitals. NS did not always know the differences and similarities between different drugs, which led to several mistakes and was a common problem in their everyday work.
"... another kind of tablet that has been exchanged for another, and then they sometimes write that they didn't have the tablet at home, but they do not write the new name of the drug." (NS 3)
Organization – within and between
Organizational deficiencies can cause errors in medication management. The categories presented below concern errors due to the lack of instructions, deprived working conditions, and underreported incidents.
Not following instructions
The RN informed about a demand from the social care service managers that all NS need a delegation to administer medication. The informants explained that newly employed social care staff felt a pressure to quickly accept and obtain delegation to relieve the workload of their colleagues. The FRNs stated that there was a risk that the RNs did not explain why they delegate and forgot the purpose of the training. They also noticed that, for some RNs, delegation became a purely administrative task, but somehow, they still followed the guidelines. The RNs emphasized difficulties in being updated and that it was not always easy to interpret the guidelines of the Swedish National Board of Social Security about the delegation process. It emerged in the interviews with the RNs and NS that social care workers not trained in delegation sometimes handed over drugs due to lack of staff and stressful working conditions, even though it contravened against existing regulations. Other organizational errors were that caretakers got their medication in other places than in their own room or that drugs were handed over to the wrong person. It was not always the case that NS stayed in the room to ensure that the caretaker took their medicine.
“Unfortunately, just because a non-licensed staff has been hired, and their manager asks for delegation, I give them delegation. I think that we should require an interest and a general competence and that they have a good approach and attitude.” (RN 6)
Irrational working conditions
Non-licensed staff with delegation were sometimes prevented from giving the drug at certain times, for example, if an incident recently had occurred or they were interrupted in the task. This led to distraction and, for example, forgetfulness if they had handed over the drug or not, counted the tablets, or signed the prescription cards. The non-licensed staff also expressed stress and concern because they explained that the time schedule for performing delegated tasks was too short. Occasionally, errors were discovered, and the caretaker got their medication, but later than prescribed. This may result in doses being given too closely in time, and as a result, the recipient’s drug concentration could be too high. When new employees were hired as substitutes during holidays or to replace sick regular employees, then the workload was higher. The substitutes often had little or no care experience. The FRNs and the RNs agreed that there were individuals among the NS and social care workers who were not interested in working in nursing homes. In addition, if the substitutes did not understand the importance of complying with the regulations, the RN believed that the risk of mistakes increased.
"I do not think that the managers always look for how many of the staff in duty have a delegation … there has been certain weekends that there was only one staff member who was delegated. And when I was on a break, there was no one…" (NS 6)
Underreporting incidents
The informants agreed that an under-reporting of incidents related to medication management could happen. When explaining their views, the FRNs indicated that the NS did not report events to the RNs due to lack of time, and that they did not want to write reports during their spare time. Events that occurred near the end of a work shift were most at risk of not being reported. RNs and NS informed about how incidents were not reported when staff forgot to sign the prescription cards or when prescription times were delayed. The NS and RN reported that severe mistakes and mistakes regarding medication (other than warfarin and insulin) were generally not reported based on their own judgements. The interviews further revealed that NS lack knowledge of how to write a proper incident report and that reported events did not always led to changes in routines or changes in operations to the desired extent. For actions to be made, the mistakes had to be repeated. The RNs stated that their working conditions were pressured and that they did not have time for follow-up, analyze, or report incidents to an extent they would have liked. This was well known by the FRN.
“I do not think that the registered nurses as a collective are acting consistently on medication errors. However, incident reports are not written to the extent that they should be, and the registered nurses do not always conduct a correct analysis and follow up the incidents in the way that I think they should do. If I ask them, they say there is a lack of time.” (FRN 7)