Cited by 12Patient Safety and Medication ErrorsInfection Control in HealthcareElectronic Health Records Systems

Development and Implementation of a Subcutaneous Insulin Pen Label Bar Code Scanning Protocol to Prevent Wrong-Patient Insulin Pen Errors

MacMaster, Heidemarie Windham, Gonzalez, Sabina, Maruoka, Andrew, San Luis, Craig, Stannard, Daphne, Rushakoff, Joshua A., Rushakoff, Robert J.·2019·The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety

Abstract

Problem definition Insulin, a high-alert medication, is regularly prescribed in the inpatient setting for hyperglycemia and diabetes mellitus. Although convenient, insulin pens carry a risk of blood-borne pathogens if the same pen is used on multiple patients. At the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), a new nursing protocol for insulin pen administration was developed to ensure that insulin was quickly available and to identify and move to eliminate wrong-patient insulin pen errors. This protocol involved unit-based automated dispensing machines and an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated patient-specific bar code label work flow. Approach After piloting on three hospital units, this new patient-specific bar code label process was expanded hospitalwide. "Print Label For Insulin Pen" and "Scan Insulin Pen" buttons were programmed into the EHR to enable nurses to print patient-specific bar code labels. In addition, a "wrong-patient pen alert" was activated to prevent wrong-pen insulin pen administration. Outcomes For the 162,075 inpatient insulin pen administrations during the study period (April 2017-March 2018), monthly errors (rates) ranged from 13 (0.12%) to 36 (0.23%). In total, 296 near-miss events (0.18% of all insulin pen administrations) were observed and prevented. Conclusion Insulin pen work flow and EHR changes implemented at UCSF enable subcutaneous insulin to remain a time-critical medication and ensure patient safety. The wide adoption of EHRs o…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jcjq.2018.08.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Several reports indicate that inpatient use of insulin pens is safe and may improve nurse satisfaction when safety protocols, including nursing education and bar code scanning procedures, are in place to guarantee single-person use.

    “Several reports indicate that inpatient use of insulin pens is safe and may improve nurse satisfaction when safety protocols, including nursing education and bar code scanning procedures, are in place to guarantee single-person use (70-73).”

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
MacMaster, H. W., Gonzalez, S., Maruoka, A., San Luis, C., Stannard, D., Rushakoff, J. A., & Rushakoff, R. J.
Affiliations
University of California, San Francisco (US)
Corresponding author
Rushakoff, Robert J.
Venue
The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-05
Volume
45
Issue
5
Pages
380-386
ISSN
1553-7250 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2892893308
Cited by
12
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2
FWCI
2.69
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Infectious Diseases › Infection Control in Healthcare
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
Keywords
barcode scanning, electronic health record integration, high-risk medications, near misses, patient safety, diabetes mellitus, hyperglycemia, nursing protocols
MeSH terms
Electronic Data Processing, Humans, Insulin Infusion Systems, Medication Errors, San Francisco, Electronic Health Records, Patient Safety

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review