Pharmacy World & Science

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 88–91 | Cite as

Evaluation of physicochemical incompatibilities during parenteral drug administration in a paediatric intensive care unit

  • Milica Gikic
  • Ermindo R. Di Paolo
  • André Pannatier
  • Jacques Cotting


Patients in paediatric intensive care units (PICU) often receive numerous medications by the parenteral route. Frequently two or more drugs are delivered simultaneously through the same line and the risk of physicochemical incompatibilities is thus important. The objectives of this study were 1) to identify prospectively the combinations of injectable drugs administered in the PICU of our university hospital and 2) to analyze them according to information found in the literature. The data were collected by a pharmacist over a 30-day period and classified in three categories: compatible, incompatible and undocumented. Nineteen patients were included in the study with a median age of 3.2 years. The mean number (± SD) of injectable drugs per patient and per day was 6.5 (± 2.8), for a total of 26 drugs and 7 solutes. 64 combinations of drugs were observed with 2 (31.3%), 3(45.3%), 4 (10.9%) or 5 (12.5%) drugs. 81 drug — drug and 94 drug — solute combinations were recorded. Among these, 151 (86.3%) were compatible, 6 (3.4%) incompatible and 18 (10.3%) undocumented. The incompatibilities included furosemide (Lasix®), a drug in alkaline solution and Vamina-Glucose®, a total parenteral nutrition solution. No clinical consequences resulting from drug incompatibilities were shown in this study. We suggest that in vitro compatibility tests on standard drug combinations, as well as a training program for nurses on drug incompatibility problems would sensitively increase the security of parenteral drug administration.

Drug administration Drug compatibility Incompatibilities Intravenous drugs Paediatric intensive care unit 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Schneider MP, Cotting J, Pannatier A. Evaluation of nurses' errors associated in the preparation and administration of medication in a pediatric intensive care unit. Pharm World Sci 1998;20:178-82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Trissel LA. Handbook on Injectable Drugs. 9th ed. Bethesda: American Society of Hospital Pharmacists; 1996.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Trissel LA, Leissing NC. Trissel's Tables of Physical Compatibility. 1st ed. Chicago: Multimatrix Inc.; 1996.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    King JC et al. Guide to parenteral admixtures. St-Louis: Hudnell; 1997, updated quarterly.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Drug Evaluation Monographs CD-ROM]. Englewood: Micromedex Inc., 1997, updated quarterly.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chiu MF, Schwartz ML. Visual compatibility of injectable drugs used in the intensive care unit. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1997;54:64-5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Haslinger-Matzenauer M, Karger H, Kirchdorfer K, Petcold L, Rosmann van Goethem J, Kerbl H et al. Infusionsmischungen-Untersuchung der Praxis in Österreich. Infusionstherapie 1991;18:114-20.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dean B, Poolmann R. Are incompatibilities a problem? A study into the administration of multiple drug infusions in an ICU. Pharmacy in Practice 1996;6:371-2.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Simonius J. Arzneimittel-Inkompatibilitäten. PhD thesis. Basel Universität, 1991.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tissot E, Cornette C, Demoly P, Jacquet M, Barale F, Capellier G. Medication errors at the administration stage in an intensive care unit. Intensive Care Med 1999;25:353-9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kohut J, Trissel LA, Leissing NC. Don't ignore details of drugcompatibility reports. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1996;53:2339. Letter.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    North GLT, Anderson WD. Interpreting, rather than reciting, the literature on drug compatibilities. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1995; 52: 1400-4 Letter.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leissing NC, Story KO, Zaske D. Inline fluid dynamics in piggyback and manifold drug delivery systems. Am J Hosp Pharm 1989; 46:89-97.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Illgen B, Köchel D. Zusatz von Injektionslösungen zu Infusionsmischungen-Leitfaden zur Ñberprüfung von Kompatibilitäat und therapeutischer Zweckmässigkeit. Krankenhauspharmazie 1988;9:187-205Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    King JC. Incompatibilities of parenteral admixtures. In: Handbook of institutional pharmacy practice. 2nd ed. Brown TR, Smith MC, eds. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1979:370-5.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Product information, Lasix®, Hoechst, 1997.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Trissel LA, Gilbert DL, Martinez JF, Baker MB, Walter WV, Mirtallo JM. Compatibility of parenteral nutrient solutions with selected drugs during simulated Y-site administration. Am J Health-Syst Pharm 1997;54:1295-300.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bahtt-Mehta V, Rosen DA, King RS, Maksym CJ. Stability of midazolam hydrochloride in parenteral nutrient solutions. Am J Hosp Pharm 1993;50:285-8.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hill SE, Heldman LS, Goo ED, Whippo PE, Perkinson JC. Fatal microvascular pulmonary embolism from precipitation of a total nutrient admixture. J Parenter Enter Nutr 1996;20:81-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Anonymous. FDA safety alert: hazards of precipitation associated with parenteral nutrition. April 18, 1994.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Zenk KE. Y-site compatibility of drugs commonly used in the NICU. Neonatal Pharmacol Quarterly 1992;1:13-22.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Milica Gikic
    • 1
  • Ermindo R. Di Paolo
    • 1
  • André Pannatier
    • 2
  • Jacques Cotting
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of pharmacyCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisLausanneSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of pharmacyCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisLausanneSwitzerland
  3. 3.Paediatric Intensive Care UnitCentre Hospitalier Universitaire VaudoisLausanneSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations