No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
HOW BAR CODED MEDICATION ADMINISTRATION TECHNOLOGY AFFECTS THE NURSE–PATIENT RELATIONSHIPS: AN ETHNOGRAPHIC STUDY
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 26 October 2018
Abstract
Objectives:
This study aims to assess how care is mediated through technology by analyzing the interaction between nurses, patients, and a Bar Coded Medication Administration (BCMA) system. The objective is to explore how patients experience care through medication technology, with the main focus of our observations and interviews on nurses rather than patients.
Methods:
A qualitative ethnographic study was conducted in an orthopedic ward of a Dutch general hospital.
Results:
After analyses, the following two themes were discerned: (i) the use of bar code medication technology organizes double institutionalization, and (ii) nurses frequently need to work around the BCMA, as the system is not always supportive of patient needs.
Conclusions:
The results of this study indicate that BCMA is not merely a neutral tool, but an active component within the nurse–patient relationship, as it influences medication administration and profoundly affects patient participation in the care process.
Keywords
- Type
- Assessment
- Information
- International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care , Volume 34 , Issue 5 , 2018 , pp. 507 - 513
- Copyright
- Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018
Footnotes
This research was sponsored by the University of Humanistic Studies and Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital. The authors would like to thank all the nurses at the orthopedic ward for their co-operation as well as the Elisabeth-Tweesteden Hospital in Tilburg, the Netherlands, for the opportunity to perform in-depth research.
References
REFERENCES
1.Young, J, Slebodnik, M, Sands, L. Bar code technology and medication administration error. J Patient Saf. 2010;6:115–120.Google Scholar
2.Boonen, MJMH, Vosman, FJ, Niemeijer, AR. Is technology the best medicine? Three practice theoretical perspectives on medication administration technologies in nursing. Nurs Inq. 2015;23:121–127.Google Scholar
3.van der Veen, W, van den Bemt, PMLA, Wouters, H, et al. Association between workarounds and medication administration errors in bar-code-assisted medication administration in hospitals. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2018;25:385–392.Google Scholar
4.Franklin, BD. Medication errors: Do they occur in isolation? BMJ Qual Saf. 2014;23:e1-2014-002924.Google Scholar
5.Talierco, V, Schachner, B, Borbolla, D, et al. The expectations of nurses about the implementation of a barcoded medication administration system: A qualitative study. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2014;205:191–195.Google Scholar
6.Maydana, T, Giraldo, L, González, Z, et al. BarCod medication administration in ICU: Learning from our nurses. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2017;245:1095–1098.Google Scholar
7.Boonen, M, Vosman, F. Niemeijer A. Tinker, tailor, deliberate. An ethnographic inquiry into the institutionalized practice of bar-coded medication administration technology by nurses. Appl Nurs Res. 2016;33:30–35.Google Scholar
8.Holden, RJ, Rivera-Rodriguez, AJ, Faye, H, Scanlon, MC, Karsh, BT. Automation and adaptation: Nurses’ problem-solving behavior following the implementation of bar coded medication administration technology. Cogn Technol Work. 2013;15:283–296.Google Scholar
9.Niemeijer, AR, Depla, MF, Frederiks, BJ, Hertogh, CM. The experiences of people with dementia and intellectual disabilities with surveillance technologies in residential care. Nurs Ethics. 2015;22:307–320.Google Scholar
10.Andersson Marchesoni, M, Axelsson, K, Faltholm, Y, Lindberg, I. Technologies in older people's care: Values related to a caring rationality. Nurs Ethics. 2015;24:1–3.Google Scholar
11.Marck, PB. Recovering ethics after ‘technics’: developing critical text on technology. Nurs Ethics. 2000;7:5–14.Google Scholar
12.Campbell, ML, Gregor, FM. Mapping social relations: A primer in doing institutional ethnography. Walnut Creek, CA: AltaMira Press; 2004.Google Scholar
13.Smith, DE. Institutional ethnography: A sociology for people. Lanham, MD: Rowman Altamira; 2005.Google Scholar
14.Smith, DE. Institutional ethnography as practice. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield; 2006.Google Scholar
15.Nicolini, D. Practice theory, work, and organization: An introduction. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press; 2012.Google Scholar
16.Gill, R. The shadow in organizational ethnography: Moving beyond shadowing to spect-acting. Qual Res Organiz Manag. 2011; 6:115–133.Google Scholar
18.Mol, A. The logic of care: Health and the problem of patient choice. London: Routledge; 2008.Google Scholar
19.Verbeek, P. What things do: Philosophical reflections on technology, agency, and design. University Park: Penn State University Press; 2005.Google Scholar
20.Pols, J, Willems, D. Innovation and evaluation: taming and unleashing telecare technology. Sociol Health Illn. 2011;33:484–498.Google Scholar
21.O'Keefe-McCarthy, S, Technologically-mediated nursing care: the impact on moral agency. Nurs Ethics. 2009;16:786–796.Google Scholar
22.Ash, JS, Berg, M, Coiera, E. Some unintended consequences of information technology in health care: The nature of patient care information system-related errors. J Am Inform Assoc. 2004;11:104–112.Google Scholar
23.Tronto, JC. Caring democracy markets, equality, and justice. New York: New York University Press; 2013.Google Scholar
24.Achterhuis, H. American philosophy of technology: The empirical turn. Bloomington: Indiana University Press; 2001.Google Scholar