Perhaps I also need to stress another aspect not related
directly to patient safety.
The 10 ml bottle of 100 mg/ml solution will often only have
less than one ml used in a procedure and then the rest is discarded. We should routinely
cut the top of the bottle off and discard the remaining solution witnessed by
the nurse, before placing the bottle in the sharps bin.
Ketamine does have a street value, so there is potential for
the used bottle with 9 mls to be pocketed once it has been signed out from the
Drugs Book. An individual could even search through a sharps bin for a partially
used bottle of ketamine.
If there was a problem with ketamine use in the community in
the future we need the above system in place so that we can defend ourselves
from any accusations!
Hence this is another reason for the 100 mg/ml solution to
be produced in a 2 ml glass vial!
Ray
McGlone
Lancaster
From: Accident and Emergency Academic List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Ray McGlone
Sent: 13 March 2010 19:39
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Familiarity breeds contempt
I
have contacted the company but have had no response.... except what was the Lot
number on the Bottle.......
I
would favour....” as the doctor normally uses only a fraction of the 10
ml (100 mg/ml conc) for i.m. use perhaps this could be produced in a 2 ml vial.
Obviously more expensive for the company. But the multidose vial following NHS
guidelines is only being used for one dose and then being discarded.”
Ray
McGlone
Lancaster
From: Accident and Emergency Academic List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Robinson, Susan
Sent: 13 March 2010 14:54
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Familiarity breeds contempt
As Co-chairs on
the CEM Patient Safety Subcommittee Ruth and I regularly meet with colleagues
at the NPSA. I have contacted the head of medical specialties at the NPSA
regarding Ketamine and the need for standardisation. Their medication team had a look at
the reports they had received on this prior to the Channel 4 documentary
(having been pre-warned) but as it is still causing concern she will present it
at this coming weeks meeting for further discussion and action.
Sue
-----Original
Message-----
From: Accident and Emergency Academic List
[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Coats Tim - Professor
of Emergency Medicine
Sent: 10 March 2010 20:49
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Familiarity breeds contempt
Several ‘near miss’ incidents in the early days of the London HEMS
system led to a standardisation on one concentration of ketamine (10 mg / ml).
It astounds me that with all the drug safety regulation that the MHRA has in
place confusion through similar packaging is not regulated! Any root cause
analysis would suggest that different concentrations of ketamine should be in
containers that both looked and felt different (imagine a safety conscious
industry such as aviation allowing this sort of potential confusion to continue
– the CAA would be down on the manufacturer like a ton of bricks).
The Medical Devices Agency are as bad as the MHRA when it comes to
patient safety. Several years ago I reported an incident in which a central
line was placed but the dilator was left in place and the iv infusion was
connected to the dilator – which had a leur-lock type connection on it (but a
tiny bore so little fluid could be infused). The child died of hypovolaemia.
There is no reason for a dilator to have a Leur-lock so my suggestion was that
the manufacturer be required to change the device. However the MDA’s response
was that this was a training issue for the doctors!
Tim. Coats.
From: Accident
and Emergency Academic List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Ray McGlone
Sent: 06 March 2010 22:36
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Familiarity breeds contempt
I managed to download the Paper from the European Journal of
Emergency Medicine (enclosed).
A 3 yr old had cement
in his eye. The Spanish dept only stocked 50 mg/ml solution as suggested by
Green in his Paper to prevent problems. “Some EDs
that use
primarily the intravenous route but occasionally administer ketamine
intramuscularly might consider the 50-mg/mL concentration as suitable for both
purposes.”
Nurse was instructed to give 45 mg ketamine i.m. but thought
that it was 50 mg in 10 ml. So gave 9 mls of the solution i.m. (ouch!)
Child got 450 mg.
Had 5 episodes of airway manoeuvres / oxygen desaturation....
returned to normal state 20 hrs after
At Lancaster we have added the volume to be injected as well as
the dose on the dose chart.
Ray McGlone
Lancaster UK
From: Accident
and Emergency Academic List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Mark Nicol
Sent: 06 March 2010 18:12
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Familiarity breeds contempt
I agree with everything Ray has
to say.In addition it may be worth noting the NPSA alert regarding inadvertent
hi dose midazolam.has anyone suggested to NPSA that they should issue guidance
to all trusts to ring fence the hi dose ketamine to maj incidnet cupboard...
mark @macc
From: Ray McGlone
<[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask]
Sent: Sat, 6 March, 2010 13:52:49
Subject: Familiarity breeds contempt
The Hospital program on Channel 4
at 2100hrs on 7th April 2009 highlighted a recurring problem. Based
at Coventry A&E it’s theme was on the problem of alcohol and
teenagers
A teenager with orthopaedic
injuries was accidently given a gram of ketamine iv on camera and she went into
cardiac arrest. After prolonged CPR .... twice.... she made a good recovery
weeks later. Illustrated the importance of checking on the strength of ketamine
given to you. Doctor had given the 100 mg in 1 ml concentration accidently.....
so gave 10 times the normal amount stat i.v..
At Lancaster we keep the 100
mg/ml in the Major Cupboard and the weaker 10 mg/kg for i.v. use in the resus
cupboard. Prior to this Consultants had been offered the wrong concentration
in the past by a nurse.... though it was the weaker concentration......and
it was noted.
A Case Report
of inadvertent overdose was published in the European Journal of Emergency
Medicine. See reference below.
I
had previously heard of a case in Manchester in 2002 whilst on an ATLS, “A
woman received 10 times the amount of ketamine because the doctor didn't
realise the concentration he was using was 100 mg/kg and not 10 mg/kg. It was
being given IV. She was OK, but her operation was cancelled!”
Our critical incident
occurred recently. A locum who had worked in the Trust a few years ago did not
familiarise himself with the Protocol again and gave x10 the normal i.m. dose
(2.5 mg/kg) that we give in A&E because he thought the nurse was giving him
the 10mg/ml solution. The volume given 3.2 ml was a large i.m. volume to give a
small child and he realised then what he had done. The child needed
supplemental oxygen and was admitted for observation but came to no harm. We
intend to do a case report on this case.
Departments
that only give ketamine via the im or iv route can standardise on one strength
of solution, BUT this would not get around the problem of locums working in
different departments. To illustrate the point we had a similar case at Kendal
over 5 years ago when a locum gave x5 the amount i.m. again the child simply
slept off the dose.
Whilst at the
FCEM exams this week I heard of another case of a child given 10x the dose but
as it was via the oral route the child simply slept it off. Again a mix up with
the concentrations.
Giving the
wrong dose x10 via the iv route is obviously the one most likely to cause a
problem.
Enclosed is a Paper by Green
detailing many cases of inadvertent medical overdose with ketamine.
There are 2
possible solutions. The cheapest would be to clearly mark in RED that the 100
mg/ml dose is for i.m. use and the 10 mg/ml dose is for i.v. use. Not sure of
the need for 50 mg/ml dose.
Alternatively
as the doctor normally uses only a fraction of the 10 ml (100 mg/ml conc) for
i.m. use perhaps this could be produced in a 2 ml vial. Obviously more
expensive for the company. But the multidose vial following NHS guidelines is
only being used for one dose and then being discarded.
One can never
rule out human error, but as getting the concentration
strength mixed up seems to be a regular critical incident perhaps we
need a solution. I suspect there are many cases occurring around the UK, but not being reported. Ketamine is a safe drug
even when such a mishap occurs, but sooner or later there could be a fatality.
The case at Coventry was a near miss.
I would be
interested of hearing about any cases you might have come across so that I can
quote more evidence to the company. You can contact me confidentially on [log in to unmask]
Regards
Dr Ray McGlone
Prolonged sedation and airway
complications after administration of an inadvertent ketamine overdose in
emergency department.
Capape S. Mora E. Mintegui S. Garcia S.
Santiago M. Benito J.
European Journal of Emergency Medicine.
15(2):92-4, 2008 Apr.
[Case Reports. Journal Article]
UI: 18446071
Authors Full Name
Capape, Susana. Mora, Elena. Mintegui, Santiago. Garcia, Silvia. Santiago,
Mikel. Benito, Javier.
AB The use of ketamine for pediatric sedation in the Emergency
Department for painful procedures has become increasingly popular. Ketamine is
a safe and effective sedative for diagnostic or therapeutic procedures in the
Emergency Department. Sedation with this dissociative agent produces a rapid
onset action, potent analgesia, adequate sedation, amnesia and minimal side
effects. We report a case of prolonged sedation and airway complications after
administration of an inadvertent intramuscular ketamine overdose in a healthy
child.
This e-mail, including any attached
files, may contain confidential and / or privileged information and is intended
for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) printed above. If you are not the
addressee(s), any unauthorised review, disclosure, reproduction, other
dissemination or use of this e-mail, or taking of any action in reliance upon
the information contained herein, is strictly prohibited. If this e-mail has
been sent to you in error, please return to the sender. No guarantee can be
given that the contents of this email are virus free - The University Hospitals
of Leicester NHS Trust cannot be held responsible for any failure by the
recipient(s) to test for viruses before opening any attachments. The
information contained in this e-mail may be the subject of public disclosure
under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 - unless legally exempt from
disclosure, the confidentiality of this e-mail and your reply cannot be
guaranteed. Copyright in this email and any attachments created by us remains
vested in the University Hospitals of Leicester NHS Trust.