Dataset Information

The impact of preprinted prescription forms on medication prescribing errors in an ophthalmology clinic in northeast Thailand: a non-randomised interventional study.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To understand the incidence and types of medication prescribing errors in a low resource setting ophthalmology clinic and to determine the impact of a preprinted prescription based on the hospital formulary (FormularyScript) on medication prescribing errors.

Design

Non-randomised interventional study.

Setting

Ophthalmology clinic in a teaching hospital in northeast Thailand.

Participants

4349 handwritten prescriptions collected from October 2009 to December 2009, and 4146 FormularyScripts collected from February 2010 to May 2010.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

All prescriptions from the handwritten and FormularyScript groups were analysed for medication error rates by types (legibility, ambiguous, incomplete, abbreviation and accuracy) and subtypes (drug name, strength, which eye, route and dispensed amount).

Results

Comparison of error rates in the two groups showed a 10-fold reduction in the overall error rate using FormularyScript (32.9%-3.5%, p<0.001). FormularyScripts were associated with statistically significant (p<0.001) decreases in the following error types: legibility (16.1%-0.1%), incomplete (16.1%-0.1%) and abbreviation (3.1%-0.3%). There was no statistically significant change in accuracy errors (0.8%-0.6%, p=0.21). Ambiguous errors increased with FormularyScripts (0.6%-2.5%, p<0.001), likely due to the introduction of new ways to make errors. Decreases were seen in all legibility, abbreviation and accuracy error subtypes, and four out of six incomplete error subtypes. There were statistically significant increases in both ambiguous error subtypes: which eye (0.3%-2.5%, p<0.001) and drug name (0.3%-0.6%, p=0.03).

Conclusions

In our study population, outpatient medication prescribing errors were common and primarily due to legibility and incomplete error types. A preprinted prescription form has the potential to decrease medication prescribing errors related to legibility, incomplete prescribing information and use of unacceptable abbreviations without changing the overall rate of accuracy errors. However, new error types can occur.

SUBMITTER: Sanguansak T

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3289984 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Clinicians using clinical decision support (CDS) to prescribe medications have an obligation to ensure that prescriptions are safe. One option is to verify the safety of prescriptions if there is uncertainty, for example, by using drug references. Supervisory control experiments in aviation and process control have associated errors, with reduced verification arising from overreliance on decision support. However, it is unknown whether this relationship extends to clinical decision-making. Therefore, we examine whether there is a relationship between verification behaviors and prescribing errors, with and without CDS medication alerts, and whether task complexity mediates this. METHODS:A total of 120 students in the final 2 years of a medical degree prescribed medicines for patient scenarios using a simulated electronic prescribing system. CDS (correct, incorrect, and no CDS) and task complexity (low and high) were varied. Outcomes were omission (missed prescribing errors) and commission errors (accepted false-positive alerts). Verification measures were access of drug references and view time percentage of task time. RESULTS:Failure to access references for medicines with prescribing errors increased omission errors with no CDS (high-complexity: ? 2(1)?=?12.716; p?<?0.001) and incorrect CDS (Fisher's exact; low-complexity: p?=?0.002; high-complexity: p?=?0.001). Failure to access references for false-positive alerts increased commission errors (low-complexity: ? 2(1)?=?16.673, p?<?0.001; high-complexity: ? 2(1)?=?18.690, p?<?0.001). Fewer participants accessed relevant references with incorrect CDS compared with no CDS (McNemar; low-complexity: p?<?0.001; high-complexity: p?<?0.001). Lower view time percentages increased omission (F(3, 361.914)?=?4.498; p?=?0.035) and commission errors (F(1, 346.223)?=?2.712; p?=?0.045). View time percentages were lower in CDS-assisted conditions compared with unassisted conditions (F(2, 335.743)?=?10.443; p?<?0.001). DISCUSSION:The presence of CDS reduced verification of prescription safety. When CDS was incorrect, reduced verification was associated with increased prescribing errors. CONCLUSION:CDS can be incorrect, and verification provides one mechanism to detect errors. System designers need to facilitate verification without increasing workload or eliminating the benefits of correct CDS.

Project description:BackgroundLiquid medication dosing errors (LMDE) made by caregivers affect treatment in children, but this is not a well-studied topic in many low-and middle-income countries including in India.MethodsAn intervention study was conducted among mothers attending a pediatric outpatient clinic of a tertiary care setting in Ujjain, India. The mothers randomly measured 12 volumes of a paracetamol liquid preparation by using a dropper (0.5 and 1 mL), measuring cup (2.5 and 5 mL), and calibrated spoon (2.5 and 5 mL) each with two instructions-oral-only measurement session (OMS) and oral plus pictogram measurement session (OPMS, the intervention). The main outcome was dosing error prevalence. The effectiveness of the intervention was assessed by measuring effect size. Risk factors for maximum LMDE were explored using backward multivariate logistic regression models. A P value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.ResultsIn total, 310 mothers [mean (± SD) age, 30.2 (± 4.18) years] were included. LMDE prevalence in the OMS versus OPMS for dropper 0.5 mL was 60% versus 48%; for l mL dropper was 63% versus 54%; for 2.5 mL cup 62% versus 54%; for 2.5 calibrated spoon 66% versus 59%; 5 mL cup 69% versus 57%; and 5 mL calibrated spoon 68% versus 55%. Comparing OMS with OPMS, underdosing was minimum with the calibrated spoon for 2.5 mL (OR 4.39) and maximum with the dropper for 1 mL (OR 9.40), and overdosing was minimum with the dropper for 0.5 mL (OR 7.12) and maximum with the calibrated spoon for 2.5 mL (OR 13.24). The effect size (dCohen) of the intervention OPMS was 1.86-6.4. Risk factors for the most prevalent dosing error, that is, with the calibrated spoon for 2.5 mL, were increasing age of the mother (aOR 1.08; P = 0.026) and nuclear family (aOR 2.83; P = 0.002). The risk of dosing errors decreased with higher education of the mothers.ConclusionsPictograms can effectively minimize LMDE even in less educated mothers.