2.50
Hdl Handle:
http://hdl.handle.net/10755/163495
Category:
Abstract
Type:
Presentation
Title:
Content validation of the Medication Error Worksheet (c)
Author(s):
Zuzelo, Patti
Author Details:
Patti Zuzelo, Associate Professor, LaSalle University, School of Nursing, Warminster, Pennsylvania, USA, email: zuzelo@lasalle.edu
Abstract:
The purpose of this study was to assess the content validity of the Institute for Safe Medication Practice's (ISMP) Medication Error Worksheet(c) (MEW). The MEW is used as a questioning framework to guide the preliminary data collection processes used by ISMP professionals when beginning analysis of a medication error. Additionally, when requested, ISMP staff provides the MEW to medication safety officers or risk managers to guide data collection efforts when beginning medication error investigations. The intent of the MEW is to support an exhaustive review of the medication use system under scrutiny in order to make recommendations for improvement and to reduce the likelihood of future errors. Although the worksheet has been valuable to the ISMP staff, its content validity had not been determined. Content validity methods included expert validation and a review of the related literature. The experts were selected based upon content expertise demonstrated via conference speaking, publications, or research-based activities. An initial pool of eight experts was identified. Each expert received an explanatory letter requesting participation and a blinded copy of the reformatted MEW instrument. After telephone and electronic mail follow-up, three experts participated in the study. The worksheet was reformatted to allow for inclusion of a rating scale and comment column. Included with the worksheet was a set of instructions detailing the process by which the experts were to evaluate each item and the instrument as a whole. A thorough review of multidisciplinary literature was conducted using two databases, Cumulated Index of Allied Health and Nursing Literature (CINAHL) and Medline. The time frame for the references was open-ended. References were organized around the pre-established instrument categories. A documentation trail was developed to protect the accuracy of the bibliographic citations and to provide a convenient method for editorial verification of citation details. The level of inter-rater agreement (IRA) for content expert rankings was .73. Acceptable IRA ranges from .70 to .80. The total CVI for the MEW was .78. The item CVI ranged from .33 to 1.0. Two items had a CVI of .33. The experts were asked to comment on omissions, suggestions for improved clarity, and general considerations for each category and item. In general, the experts were satisfied with the MEW and evaluated it as "comprehensive" and "relevant." The experts offered suggestions for improving the MEW that tended to focus on the specificity and clarity of the instrument. The literature review did not reveal additional categories or items that required inclusion in the MEW. The references supported the MEW content and suggested that the MEW instrument was complete and consistent with the related literature. The results of this study were shared with ISMP staff and subsequent revisions are planned. The content validation strategies generated suggestions that will support a more accurately crafted instrument that is not dependent upon the interpretation of the user for its data yield.
Repository Posting Date:
27-Oct-2011
Date of Publication:
27-Oct-2011
Conference Date:
2002
Conference Name:
14th Annual Scientific Sessions
Conference Host:
Eastern Nursing Research Society
Conference Location:
University Park, Pennsylvania, USA
Note:
This is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.

Full metadata record

DC FieldValue Language
dc.type.categoryAbstracten_US
dc.typePresentationen_GB
dc.titleContent validation of the Medication Error Worksheet (c)en_GB
dc.contributor.authorZuzelo, Pattien_US
dc.author.detailsPatti Zuzelo, Associate Professor, LaSalle University, School of Nursing, Warminster, Pennsylvania, USA, email: zuzelo@lasalle.eduen_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10755/163495-
dc.description.abstractThe purpose of this study was to assess the content validity of the Institute for Safe Medication Practice's (ISMP) Medication Error Worksheet(c) (MEW). The MEW is used as a questioning framework to guide the preliminary data collection processes used by ISMP professionals when beginning analysis of a medication error. Additionally, when requested, ISMP staff provides the MEW to medication safety officers or risk managers to guide data collection efforts when beginning medication error investigations. The intent of the MEW is to support an exhaustive review of the medication use system under scrutiny in order to make recommendations for improvement and to reduce the likelihood of future errors. Although the worksheet has been valuable to the ISMP staff, its content validity had not been determined. Content validity methods included expert validation and a review of the related literature. The experts were selected based upon content expertise demonstrated via conference speaking, publications, or research-based activities. An initial pool of eight experts was identified. Each expert received an explanatory letter requesting participation and a blinded copy of the reformatted MEW instrument. After telephone and electronic mail follow-up, three experts participated in the study. The worksheet was reformatted to allow for inclusion of a rating scale and comment column. Included with the worksheet was a set of instructions detailing the process by which the experts were to evaluate each item and the instrument as a whole. A thorough review of multidisciplinary literature was conducted using two databases, Cumulated Index of Allied Health and Nursing Literature (CINAHL) and Medline. The time frame for the references was open-ended. References were organized around the pre-established instrument categories. A documentation trail was developed to protect the accuracy of the bibliographic citations and to provide a convenient method for editorial verification of citation details. The level of inter-rater agreement (IRA) for content expert rankings was .73. Acceptable IRA ranges from .70 to .80. The total CVI for the MEW was .78. The item CVI ranged from .33 to 1.0. Two items had a CVI of .33. The experts were asked to comment on omissions, suggestions for improved clarity, and general considerations for each category and item. In general, the experts were satisfied with the MEW and evaluated it as "comprehensive" and "relevant." The experts offered suggestions for improving the MEW that tended to focus on the specificity and clarity of the instrument. The literature review did not reveal additional categories or items that required inclusion in the MEW. The references supported the MEW content and suggested that the MEW instrument was complete and consistent with the related literature. The results of this study were shared with ISMP staff and subsequent revisions are planned. The content validation strategies generated suggestions that will support a more accurately crafted instrument that is not dependent upon the interpretation of the user for its data yield.en_GB
dc.date.available2011-10-27T11:08:33Z-
dc.date.issued2011-10-27en_GB
dc.date.accessioned2011-10-27T11:08:33Z-
dc.conference.date2002en_US
dc.conference.name14th Annual Scientific Sessionsen_US
dc.conference.hostEastern Nursing Research Societyen_US
dc.conference.locationUniversity Park, Pennsylvania, USAen_US
dc.description.noteThis is an abstract-only submission. If the author has submitted a full-text item based on this abstract, you may find it by browsing the Virginia Henderson Global Nursing e-Repository by author. If author contact information is available in this abstract, please feel free to contact him or her with your queries regarding this submission. Alternatively, please contact the conference host, journal, or publisher (according to the circumstance) for further details regarding this item. If a citation is listed in this record, the item has been published and is available via open-access avenues or a journal/database subscription. Contact your library for assistance in obtaining the as-published article.-
All Items in this repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.