Dataset Information

A qualitative study of prescribing errors among multi-professional prescribers within an e-prescribing system.

ABSTRACT: Background Computerised Physician Order Entry (CPOE) is considered to enhance the safety of prescribing. However, it can have unintended consequences and new forms of prescribing error have been reported. Objective The aim of this study was to explore the causes and contributing factors associated with prescribing errors reported by multidisciplinary prescribers working within a CPOE system. Main Outcome Measure Multidisciplinary prescribers experience of prescribing errors in an CPOE system. Method This qualitative study was conducted in a hospital with a well-established CPOE system. Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with prescribers from the professions of pharmacy, nursing, and medicine. Interviews analysed using a mixed inductive and deductive approach to develop a framework for the causes of error. Results Twenty-three prescribers were interviewed. Six main themes influencing prescribing were found: the system, the prescriber, the patient, the team, the task of prescribing and the work environment. Prominent issues related to CPOE included, incorrect drug name picking, default auto-population of dosages, alert fatigue and remote prescribing. These interacted within a complex prescribing environment. No substantial differences in the experience of CPOE were found between the professions. Conclusion Medical and non-medical prescribers have similar experiences of prescribing errors when using CPOE, aligned with existing published literature about medical prescribing. Causes of electronic prescribing errors are multifactorial in nature and prescribers describe how factors interact to create the conditions errors. While interventions should focus on direct CPOE issues, such as training and design, socio-technical, and environmental aspects of practice remain important.

SUBMITTER: Alshahrani F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8352824 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAlthough statements on the competencies required from physicians working within palliative care exist, these requirements have not been described within different levels of palliative care provision by multi-professional workshops, comprising representatives from working life. Therefore, the aim of this study was to describe the competencies required from physicians working within palliative care from the perspectives of multi-professional groups of representatives from working life.MethodsA qualitative approach, using a workshop method, was conducted, wherein the participating professionals and representatives of patient organizations discussed the competencies that are required in palliative care, before reaching and documenting a consensus. The data (n?=?222) was collected at workshops held in different parts of Finland and it was analyzed using a qualitative content analysis method.ResultsThe description of the competencies required of every physician working within palliative care at the general level included 13 main categories and 50 subcategories in total. 'Competence in advanced care planning and decision-making' was the main category which was obtained from the highest number of reduced expressions from the original data (f?=?125). Competence in social interactions was another strong main category (f?=?107). In specialist level data, six main categories with 22 subcategories in total were found. 'Competence in complex symptom management' was the main category which was obtained from the biggest number of reduced expressions (f?=?46). A notable association between general level and specialist level data was related to networking, since one of the general level categories was 'Competence in consultations and networking' (f?=?34) and one of the specialist level categories was 'Competence to offer consultative and educational support to other professionals' (f?=?30). Moreover, part of the specialist level results were subcategories which belonged to the main categories produced from the general level data.ConclusionsThe competencies described in this study emphasize decision-making, social interactions and networking. It is important to listen to the voices of the working-life representatives when planning curricula. Moreover, the views of the working-life representatives inform how the competencies gained during their education meet the challenges of the ordinary work.

Project description:ObjectivesStudy objectives were to investigate the prevalence and causes of prescribing errors amongst foundation doctors (i.e. junior doctors in their first (F1) or second (F2) year of post-graduate training), describe their knowledge and experience of prescribing errors, and explore their self-efficacy (i.e. confidence) in prescribing.MethodA three-part mixed-methods design was used, comprising: prospective observational study; semi-structured interviews and cross-sectional survey. All doctors prescribing in eight purposively selected hospitals in Scotland participated. All foundation doctors throughout Scotland participated in the survey. The number of prescribing errors per patient, doctor, ward and hospital, perceived causes of errors and a measure of doctors' self-efficacy were established.Results4710 patient charts and 44,726 prescribed medicines were reviewed. There were 3364 errors, affecting 1700 (36.1%) charts (overall error rate: 7.5%; F1:7.4%; F2:8.6%; consultants:6.3%). Higher error rates were associated with : teaching hospitals (p<0.001), surgical (p = <0.001) or mixed wards (0.008) rather thanmedical ward, higher patient turnover wards (p<0.001), a greater number of prescribed medicines (p<0.001) and the months December and June (p<0.001). One hundred errors were discussed in 40 interviews. Error causation was multi-factorial; work environment and team factors were particularly noted. Of 548 completed questionnaires (national response rate of 35.4%), 508 (92.7% of respondents) reported errors, most of which (328 (64.6%) did not reach the patient. Pressure from other staff, workload and interruptions were cited as the main causes of errors. Foundation year 2 doctors reported greater confidence than year 1 doctors in deciding the most appropriate medication regimen.ConclusionsPrescribing errors are frequent and of complex causation. Foundation doctors made more errors than other doctors, but undertook the majority of prescribing, making them a key target for intervention. Contributing causes included work environment, team, task, individual and patient factors. Further work is needed to develop and assess interventions that address these.

Project description:BackgroundPrescribing error represent a significant source of preventable harm to patients. Prescribing errors at discharge, including omission of pre-admission medications (PAM), are particularly harmful as they frequently propagate following discharge. This study assesses the impact of an educational intervention and introduction of an electronic patient record (EPR) in the same centre on omission of PAM at discharge using a pragmatic design. A survey of newly qualified doctors is used to contextualise findings.MethodsDischarge prescriptions and discharge summaries were reviewed at discharge, and compared to admission medicine lists, using a paper-based chart system. Discrepancies were noted, using Health Information and Quality Authority guidelines for discharge prescribing. An educational intervention was conducted. Further review of discharge prescriptions and discharge summaries took place. Following introduction of an EPR, review of discharge summaries and discharge prescriptions was repeated. A survey was administered to recently qualified doctors (interns), and analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis.ResultsOmission of PAM as prescribed or discontinued items at discharge occurs frequently. An educational intervention did not significantly change prescribing error rates (U = 1255.5, p = 0.206). EPR introduction did significantly reduce omission of PAM on discharge prescribing (U = 694, p < 0.001), however there was also a reduction in the rate of deliberate discontinuation of PAM at discharge (U = 1237.5, p = 0.007). Survey results demonstrated that multiple sources are required to develop a discharge prescription. Time pressure, access to documentation and lack of admission medicine reconciliation are frequently cited causes of discharge prescribing error.ConclusionThis study verified passive educational interventions alone do not improve discharge prescribing. Introduction of EPR improved discharge prescribing, but negatively impacted deliberate discontinuation of PAM at discharge. This is attributable to reduced access to key sources of information used in formulating discharge prescriptions, and separation of the discontinuation function from the prescribing function on the EPR discharge application.

Dataset Information

A qualitative study of prescribing errors among multi-professional prescribers within an e-prescribing system.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets