Economic impact of medication error: a systematic review

Suicidal and accidental drug poisoning mortality among older adults and working-age individuals in Spain between 2000 and 2018

BACKGROUND

Although medication poisoning in older adults is considered an increasingly important, but preventable cause of death, it has received relatively little attention. We explored recent trends and correlates of suicidal and accidental fatal drug poisonings among older and working-age individuals using nationwide data from Spain.

METHODS

We identified all 15,353 fatal drug poisonings involving decedents aged ≥15 years in Spain between 2000 and 2018 and divided them by age into older adults (≥65 years) and working-age (15-64 years) individuals. For each age group, we analyzed time trends in suicidal and accidental fatal drug poisoning rates (overall and by ICD-10 drug categories) using joinpoint regressions. To understand the specific drugs classified as "Non-psychotropic/non-specified", we used 2018 data including substance-specific ICD-10 supplementary codes. We explored relevant sociodemographic correlates of suicidal and accidental fatal poisoning rates using multivariable negative binomial regressions.

RESULTS

Between 2000 and 2018, suicidal fatal poisonings increased faster among older (from 0.19 to 0.63 per 100,000 - average annual change: 7.7%) than working-age individuals (from 0.40 to 0.72 per 100,000 - average annual change: 3.8%). Accidental fatal poisonings increased among older adults (from 0.25 to 2.67 per 100,000 - average annual change: 16.2%) but decreased among working-age counterparts (from 2.38 to 1.42 per 100,000 - average annual change: - 1.9%). Anticoagulants and cardiac-stimulants glycosides accounted for 70% of the 223 accidental fatal poisonings due to non-psychotropic/non-specified drugs registered among older adults in 2018. Roles of gender and urban dwelling in suicidal and accidental poisonings were heterogeneous across age groups.

CONCLUSION

Increases in suicidal drug poisonings were faster among older than working-age individuals. Accidental fatal poisonings increased only among older adults. Our findings that (i) sociodemographic correlates were heterogeneous across age groups and (ii) anticoagulant and cardiac-stimulant glycosides were particularly salient drivers of accidental poisonings among older adults have implications for prevention.

Costs and Cost-Effectiveness of User-Testing of Health Professionals' Guidelines to Reduce the Frequency of Intravenous Medicines Administration Errors by Nurses in the United Kingdom: A Probabilistic Model Based on Voriconazole Administration

AIM

In the UK, injectable medicines are often prepared and administered by nurses following the Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG). Our earlier study confirmed a higher frequency of correct administration with user-tested versus standard IMG guidelines. This current study aimed to model the cost-effectiveness of user-testing.

METHODS

The costs and cost-effectiveness of user-testing were explored by modifying an existing probabilistic decision-analytic model. The adapted model considered administration of intravenous voriconazole to hospital inpatients by nurses. It included 11 error types, their probability of detection and level of harm. Model inputs (including costs) were derived from our previous study and other published data. Monte Carlo simulation using 20,000 samples (sufficient for convergence) was performed with a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of the 121 NHS trusts and health boards that use the IMG. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the risk of a medication error and other sources of uncertainty.

RESULTS

The net monetary benefit at £20,000/quality-adjusted life year was £3,190,064 (95% credible interval (CrI): -346,709 to 8,480,665), favouring user-testing with a 96% chance of cost-effectiveness. Incremental cost-savings were £240,943 (95% CrI 43,527-491,576), also favouring user-tested guidelines with a 99% chance of cost-saving. The total user testing cost was £6317 (95% CrI 6012-6627). These findings were robust to assumptions about a range of input parameters, but greater uncertainty was seen with a lower medication error risk.

CONCLUSIONS

User-testing of injectable medicines guidelines is a low-cost intervention that is highly likely to be cost-effective, especially for high-risk medicines.

Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare professional or patient. Medication errors in hospitalised adults may cause harm, additional costs, and even death.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce medication errors in adults in hospital settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers on 16 January 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies investigating interventions aimed at reducing medication errors in hospitalised adults, compared with usual care or other interventions. Outcome measures included adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs, preventable ADEs, medication errors, mortality, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life and identified/solved discrepancies. We included any hospital setting, such as inpatient care units, outpatient care settings, and accident and emergency departments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Where necessary, we extracted and reanalysed ITS study data using piecewise linear regression, corrected for autocorrelation and seasonality, where possible.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 studies: 51 RCTs and 14 ITS studies, involving 110,875 participants. About half of trials gave rise to 'some concerns' for risk of bias during the randomisation process and one-third lacked blinding of outcome assessment. Most ITS studies presented low risk of bias. Most studies came from high-income countries or high-resource settings. Medication reconciliation -the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to the medications that the patient has been taking- was the most common type of intervention studied. Electronic prescribing systems, barcoding for correct administering of medications, organisational changes, feedback on medication errors, education of professionals and improved medication dispensing systems were other interventions studied. Medication reconciliation Low-certainty evidence suggests that medication reconciliation (MR) versus no-MR may reduce medication errors (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.74; 3 studies; n=379). Compared to no-MR, MR probably reduces ADEs (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.80; 3 studies, n=1336 ; moderate-certainty evidence), but has little to no effect on length of stay (mean difference (MD) -0.30 days, 95%CI -1.93 to 1.33 days; 3 studies, n=527) and quality of life (MD -1.51, 95%CI -10.04 to 7.02; 1 study, n=131).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may reduce medication errors (OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.48; 8 studies, n=2648) and may increase ADEs (OR 1.34, 95%CI 0.73 to 2.44; 3 studies, n=2873). Compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may have little to no effect on length of stay (MD -0.25, 95%CI -1.05 to 0.56; 6 studies, 3983). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that this intervention probably has little to no effect on mortality during hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.7; 2 studies, n=1000), and on readmissions at one month (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.14; 2 studies, n=997); and low-certainty evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on quality of life (MD 0.00, 95%CI -14.09 to 14.09; 1 study, n=724).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that database-assisted MR conducted by pharmacists, versus unassisted MR conducted by pharmacists, may reduce potential ADEs (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.64; 2 studies, n=3326), and may have no effect on length of stay (MD 1.00, 95%CI -0.17 to 2.17; 1 study, n=311).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR performed by trained pharmacist technicians, versus pharmacists, may have little to no difference on length of stay (MD -0.30, 95%CI -2.12 to 1.52; 1 study, n=183). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR before admission may increase the identification of discrepancies compared with MR after admission (MD 1.27, 95%CI 0.46 to 2.08; 1 study, n=307). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that multimodal interventions probably increase discrepancy resolutions compared to usual care (RR 2.14, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.53; 1 study, n=487). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE)/clinical decision support systems (CDSS) Moderate-certainty evidence shows that CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors compared to paper-based systems (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.31 to 1.79; 2 studies, n=88).  Moderate-certainty evidence shows that, compared with standard CPOE/CDSS, improved CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.97; 2 studies, n=630). Low-certainty evidence suggests that prioritised alerts provided by CPOE/CDSS may prevent ADEs compared to non-prioritised (inconsequential) alerts (MD 1.98, 95%CI 1.65 to 2.31; 1 study; participant numbers unavailable). Barcode identification of participants/medications Low-certainty evidence suggests that barcoding may reduce medication errors (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=50,545). Reduced working hours Low-certainty evidence suggests that reduced working hours may reduce serious medication errors (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63 to 1.09; 1 study, n=634). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Feedback on prescribing errors Low-certainty evidence suggests that feedback on prescribing errors may reduce medication errors (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, n=384). Dispensing system Low-certainty evidence suggests that dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=1775).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual care, medication reconciliation, CPOE/CDSS, barcoding, feedback and dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors and ADEs. However, the results are imprecise for some outcomes related to medication reconciliation and CPOE/CDSS. The evidence for other interventions is very uncertain. Powered and methodologically sound studies are needed to address the identified evidence gaps. Innovative, synergistic strategies -including those that involve patients- should also be evaluated.

Healthcare professionals' perceptions on medication communication challenges and solutions - text mining and manual content analysis - cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Communication challenges contribute to medication incidents in hospitals, but it is unclear how communication can be improved. The aims of this study were threefold: firstly, to describe the most common communication challenges related to medication incidents as perceived by healthcare professionals across specialized hospitals for adult patients; secondly, to consider suggestions from healthcare professionals with regard to improving medication communication; and thirdly, to explore how text mining compares to manual analysis when analyzing the free-text content of survey data.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional, descriptive study. A digital survey was sent to professionals in two university hospital districts in Finland from November 1, 2019, to January 31, 2020. In total, 223 professionals answered the open-ended questions; respondents were primarily registered nurses (77.7 %), physicians (8.6 %), and pharmacists (7.3 %). Text mining and manual inductive content analysis were employed for qualitative data analysis.

RESULTS

The communication challenges were: (1) inconsistent documentation of prescribed and administered medication; (2) failure to document orally given prescriptions; (3) nurses' unawareness of prescriptions (given outside of ward rounds) due to a lack of oral communication from the prescribers; (4) breaks in communication during care transitions to non-communicable software; (5) incomplete home medication reconciliation at admission and discharge; (6) medication lists not being updated during the inpatient period due to a lack of clarity regarding the responsible professional; and (7) work/environmental factors during medication dispensation and the receipt of verbal prescriptions. Suggestions for communication enhancements included: (1) structured digital prescriptions; (2) guidelines and training on how to use documentation systems; (3) timely documentation of verbal prescriptions and digital documentation of administered medication; (4) communicable software within and between organizations; (5) standardized responsibilities for updating inpatients' medication lists; (6) nomination of a responsible person for home medication reconciliation at admission and discharge; and (7) distraction-free work environment for medication communication. Text mining and manual analysis extracted similar primary results.

CONCLUSIONS

Non-communicable software, non-standardized medication communication processes, lack of training on standardized documentation, and unclear responsibilities compromise medication safety in hospitals. Clarification is needed regarding interdisciplinary medication communication processes, techniques, and responsibilities. Text mining shows promise for free-text analysis.

Incidence rate and financial burden of medical errors and policy interventions to address them: a multi-method study protocol

Medical error is one of the most critical challenges facing medical services. They pose a substantial threat to patient safety, and their costs draw attention from policymakers, health care planners and researchers. We aim to make a realistic estimation of medical error incidence and related costs and identify factors influencing this incidence in Iranian hospitals. In the first phase of this multi-method study, through two reviews of systematic reviews and a meta-analysis, we will estimate the incidence of medical errors and the strategies to reduce them. We will extract available data among 41 hospitals supervised by the East Azerbaijan University in the second phase. We will also develop a model and use a Delphi method to predict medical errors incidence and calibrate our model output using the Monte Carlo simulation. We will compare this estimation with the incidence rate based on meta-analysis results from the first phase. In the third phase, we will investigate the relationship between several factors potentially influencing medical error incidence. In the fourth phase, we will estimate costs associated with medical errors by conducting a patient records review and matching those with claims related to medical errors. In the fifth phase, we will present a policy brief related to strategies for medical errors and associated costs reduction in Iran. Our findings could benefit Iranian and policymakers in other countries to reduce medical errors and associated costs.

Real-world pharmacological treatment patterns of patients with threatened miscarriage in China from 2014 to 2020: A cross-sectional analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Approximately half of the patients with threatened miscarriage suffer an abortion, and consistent medication therapy to prevent threatened miscarriage is lacking. Our goal was to investigate the real-world pharmacological treatment patterns of patients with threatened miscarriage in China, with a focus on the trend and rationality of progestogen use over the last 7 years.

METHODS

We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data from the Hospital Prescription Analysis Cooperation Project that is overseen by the Chinese Pharmaceutical Association. Information was extracted from prescriptions of outpatients with threatened miscarriage between January 2014 and December 2020. We quantified the types of medications using the first level anatomical therapeutic chemical (ATC) classification code and the frequency of use of medicines classified as category X by the United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA). We also calculated the prevalence of the most frequently used progestogens by assessing prescription rates, determined the sum of the defined daily doses (DDDs) and defined daily cost (DDC) and evaluated the rationality of progestogens according to drug labels and guidelines.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Of the 91,464 patients included in this study, 69.4% were from the eastern region, 92.5% were from tertiary hospitals, and 72.9% were between 25 and 34 years old. The average number of medications per patient was 1.4. The following types of medicines were the most prevalent: "genitourinary system and sex hormones" (90.7%), "alimentary tract and metabolism" (10.8%) and "blood and blood-forming organs" (9.9%). Progestogens were prescribed for 81,080 patients (88.6%), among which oral progesterone (39.7%) was the most commonly used, followed by oral dydrogesterone (34.4%), progesterone injection (26.0%), oral allylestrenol (0.7%) and progesterone gel (0.4%). In other words, 10,991 (12.0%) patients used more than one progestogen, and the top three combinations were oral dydrogesterone plus progesterone injection (5.6%), oral progesterone plus progesterone injection (4.7%) and oral dydrogesterone plus oral progesterone (1.1%). The prescription rate of dydrogesterone increased gradually, whereas that of progesterone, especially progesterone injection, obviously decreased. Among 34,760 prescriptions of progestogens with complete usage information, the primary errors of progestogen use were "low frequency" (18.4%), "high single dose" (15.9%) and "low single dose" (11.3%). In addition, 137 prescriptions were identified with drug-progestogen interactions, and 61 were identified with contraindications for progestogens. A total of 4.5% of prescriptions included FDA category X medicines.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our findings are the first to provide information on medication use in patients with threatened miscarriage over the last seven years in China. Medicines targeting the "genitourinary system and sex hormones," especially progestogens, were the most commonly prescribed medications, among which dydrogesterone was the most prevalent. However, it is remarkable that the use of progestogens for the treatment of threatened abortion is still controversial; thus, high-quality large sample studies are still required, especially among Chinese patients. Since usage errors in progestogen records and exposure to category X medicines were common, more efforts are needed to guarantee the safety and rationality of medicines used in pregnant women.

Medication-related adverse events in health care-what have we learned? A narrative overview of the current knowledge

Purpose

Although medication-related adverse events (MRAEs) in health care are vastly studied, high heterogeneity in study results complicates the interpretations of the current situation. The main objective of this study was to form an up-to-date overview of the current knowledge of the prevalence, risk factors, and surveillance of MRAEs in health care.

Methods

Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched with applicable search terms to collect information on medication-related adverse events. In order to obtain an up-to-date view of MRAEs, only studies published after 2000 were accepted.

Results

The prevalence rates of different MRAEs vary greatly between individual studies and meta-analyses. Study setting, patient population, and detection methods play an important role in determining detection rates, which should be regarded while interpreting the results. Medication-related adverse events are more common in elderly patients and patients with lowered liver or kidney function, polypharmacy, and a large number of additional comorbidities. However, the risk of MRAEs is also significantly increased by the use of high-risk medicines but also in certain care situations. Preventing MRAEs is important as it will decrease patient mortality and morbidity but also reduce costs and functional challenges related to them.

Conclusions

Medication-related adverse events are highly common and have both immediate and long-term effects to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. Conclusive solutions for prevention of all medication-related harm are impossible to create. In the future, however, the development of efficient real-time detection methods can provide significant improvements for event prevention and forecasting.

Patient Factors Associated with Pharmaceutical Interventions for Inpatients at a Brazilian Teaching Hospital

Background

Pharmaceutical interventions aim to correct or prevent a drug-related problem (DRP) that might lead to negative clinical consequences and increase health care costs.

Objective

To identify variables associated with the provision of pharmaceutical interventions by clinical pharmacists during hospitalization.

Methods

In this retrospective cohort study, adult inpatients of the medical ward of the University Hospital of the University of São Paulo in São Paulo, Brazil, were followed from admission to discharge. Logistic regression models were used to evaluate the association between occurrence of at least 1 pharmaceutical intervention and the following baseline characteristics: sex, age, Charlson comorbidity index, renal failure, electrolyte imbalance, hemoglobin, platelet count, and use of a nasoenteric tube, as well as the number, second-level Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical (ATC) code, and administration route of prescribed medications.

Results

A total of 148 patients were included in the study, of whom 75 (50.7%) were men. The mean age was 62.8 (95% confidence interval [CI] 59.9-65.8) years, and the mean length of the hospital stay was 10.7 (95% CI 8.4-13.1) days. Analgesics (ATC code N02), the most common type of medication, were prescribed to 144 (97.3%) of the patients. Pharmaceutical interventions were performed for only 49 (33.1%) of the patients. One out of every 4 of these interventions was intended to obtain information not provided in the prescription, to allow the prescription to be completed and dispensing to proceed. According to the multivariate analysis, the odds ratio (OR) of occurrence of at least 1 pharmaceutical intervention increased for patients with electrolyte imbalance (OR 2.68, 95% CI 1.09-6.63; p = 0.033), patients using 5 to 8 medications (OR 8.73, 95% CI 1.07-71.36; p = 0.043), patients using 9 or more medications (OR 10.39, 95% CI 1.28-84.05; p = 0.028), and patients using at least 1 systemic antibacterial (ATC code J01; OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.30-5.84; p = 0.008).

Conclusions

The findings of this study could allow the identification, at the time of admission and possibly before the occurrence of a DRP, of patients at higher risk of requiring a pharmaceutical intervention later during their hospital stay. To optimize patient care, clinical pharmacists should closely follow inpatients with electrolyte imbalance, polypharmacy, and/or use of systemic antibacterials.

Pharmacist-led educational interventions provided to healthcare providers to reduce medication errors: A systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors are avoidable events that can occur at any stage of the medication use process. They are widespread in healthcare systems and are linked to an increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Several strategies have been studied to reduce their occurrence including different types of pharmacy-based interventions. One of the main pharmacist-led interventions is educational programs, which seem to have promising benefits.

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare various pharmacist-led educational interventions delivered to healthcare providers and to evaluate their impact qualitatively and quantitatively on medication error rates.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted through searching Cochrane Library, EBSCO, EMBASE, Medline and Google Scholar from inception to June 2020. Only interventional studies that reported medication error rate change after the intervention were included. Two independent authors worked through the data extraction and quality assessment using Crowe Critical Appraisal Tool (CCAT). Summary odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model for rates of medication errors. Research protocol is available in The International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) under the registration number CRD42019116465.

RESULTS

Twelve studies involving 115058 participants were included. The two main recipients of the educational interventions were nurses and resident physicians. Educational programs involved lectures, posters, practical teaching sessions, audit and feedback method and flash cards of high-risk abbreviations. All studies included educational sessions as part of their program, either alone or in combination with other approaches, and most studies used errors encountered before implementing the intervention to inform the content of these sessions. Educational programs led by a pharmacist were associated with significant reductions in the overall rate of medication errors occurrence (OR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.22 to 0.65).

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led educational interventions directed to healthcare providers are effective at reducing medication error rates. This review supports the implementation of pharmacist-led educational intervention aimed at reducing medication errors.

Automation of in-hospital pharmacy dispensing: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The current systematic review (SR) was undertaken to identify and summarise the published literature reporting on the clinical and economic value of automated in-hospital pharmacy services with a primary focus on systems supporting the dispensing of medicines.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library on 17 December 2017 to identify English-language publications investigating any automated dispensing systems (ADSs) in the inpatient setting to include central pharmacy and ward-based systems.

RESULTS

4320 publications were screened by title and abstract and 45 of 175 full publications screened were included. Grey literature searching identified an additional three publications. Therefore, 48 publications relating to ADSs were eligible for inclusion. Although a relatively large evidence base was identified as part of the current SR, the eligible studies were inconsistent in terms of their design and the format of reporting of outcomes. The studies demonstrate that both pharmacy and ward-based ADSs offer benefits over traditional manual dispensing methods in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. The primary benefits following implementation of an ADS include reductions in medication errors, medication administration time and costs. Studies examining optimisation/inventory management strategies/refill programmes for these systems suggest that optimal implementation of the ADS is required to ensure that clinical success and economic benefits are maximised.

CONCLUSIONS

The published evidence suggests positive impacts of ADS and should encourage hospitals to invest in automation, with a global strategy to improve the reliability and the efficiency of the medication process. However, one of the key findings of the current SR is the need for further data from adequately powered studies reporting clinically relevant outcomes which would allow for robust, evidence-based recommendations on the return on investment of the technologies. These studies would probably contribute to a larger adoption of these technologies by European hospitals.

Cost-effectiveness of two technology-assisted manual medication picking systems versus traditional manual picking in a hospital outpatient pharmacy

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two technology assisted manual medication picking systems vs traditional manual picking.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study comparing three outpatient pharmacies of a tertiary referral hospital in Singapore, where a light-emitting diode (LED-guided) manual picking system, an LED-guided manual picking plus lockable drawer (LED-LD) system, and traditional manual picking were implemented, respectively. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of medication near-misses over the observation period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per near-miss avoided was also determined. Data on medications picked and near-misses reported between September 2017 and June 2018 were retrieved from electronic databases. The incidence of medication near-misses from the LED-guided and LED-LD systems, relative to traditional picking, was compared using logistic regression. We compared annual operating costs between manual medication picking systems, and reported ICERs per near-miss avoided, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of each picking system.

RESULTS

A total of 358 144, 397 343 and 254 162 medications were picked by traditional manual picking, LED-guided and LED-LD systems, respectively. The corresponding near-miss rates were 8.32, 4.08 and 0.69 per 10 000 medications picked, respectively. Medication near-miss rates were significantly lower for the LED-guided (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59, p<0.001) and LED-LD systems (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.13, p<0.001) compared with traditional picking. The annual operating costs of traditional picking, LED-guided and LED-LD systems were S$60 912, S$129 832 and S$152 894, respectively. The LED-guided and LED-LD systems yielded ICERs of S$189 and S$140 per near-miss avoided, respectively, compared with traditional manual picking.

CONCLUSION

The LED-LD system is more cost-effective than both the LED-guided and manual medication picking systems in reducing medication picking near-misses.

Construction and analysis of a database for medication errors in a pharmacovigilance centre-the Moroccan experience

PURPOSE

The study aimed to describe the epidemiological profile of medication errors (MEs) reported to the Moroccan Pharmacovigilance Center (MPVC), to determine factors associated with serious MEs, and to describe signals related to them.

METHODS

We carried out a retrospective descriptive analysis of MEs reported to the MPVC from 2006 to 2016 and a secondary analysis of the seriousness of MEs with adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The reports were sorted by demographic profile and by ME and ADR characteristics. For signal detection, a quantitative approach was adopted, and the root cause analysis was completed. Epi info 7 software was used to perform descriptive and analytical statistics. The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05.

RESULTS

A total of 1618 ME reports were retrieved. The proportion of MEs associated with serious ADRs was 23.9%. The factors statistically associated with serious MEs were as follows: (i) the age group 16 years old and less (p < 0.001), (ii) the gender (p = 0.01), (iii) the administration and the prescription stages (p < 0.001), and (iv) the ME types related to inappropriate schedule of drug administration, drug prescribing error (p < 0.001), and incorrect drug administration dosage form (p = 0.04). Fourteen signals related to MEs were detected, for which risk minimization actions were implemented.

CONCLUSION

The establishment of a ME unit within the MPVC was an opportunity to further improve the pharmacovigilance centre performance and consequently its contribution to medication safety. The lessons learned from MEs should be shared through pharmacovigilance networks and with institutions involved in medication safety for synergistic results to achieve patient safety worldwide.

Dispensing errors in Lebanese community pharmacies: incidence, types, underlying causes, and associated factors

OBJECTIVES

To assess the incidence, types, the causes of as well as the factors associated with dispensing errors in community pharmacies in Lebanon.

METHODS

An observational cross-sectional study was conducted in 286 pharmacies located all over Lebanon. Data were collected by senior pharmacy students during their experiential learning placement. Collected data included information on the types of dispensing errors, the underlying causes of errors, handling approaches, and used strategies for dispensing error prevention. Data were analyzed using multiple logistic regression to determine factors that were associated with dispensing errors.

RESULTS

In the twelve thousand eight hundred sixty dispensed medications, there were 376 dispensing errors, yielding an error rate of 2.92%. Of these errors, 67.1% (252) corresponded to dispensing near-miss errors. The most common types of dispensing errors were giving incomplete/incorrect use instructions (40.9% (154)), followed by the omission of warning(s) (23.6% (89)). Work overloads/time pressures, illegible handwriting, distractions/interruptions, and similar drug naming/packaging were reported as the underlying causes in 55% (206), 23.13% (87), 15.15 % (57), and 7% (26) of the errors respectively. Besides, high prescription turnover volume, having one pharmacist working at a time, and extended working hours, were found to be independent factors that were significantly associated with dispensing errors occurrence (p<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study sheds light on the need to establish national strategies for preventing dispensing errors in community pharmacies to maintain drug therapy safety, considering identified underlying causes and associated factors.

COSTS AND ROOT CAUSES OF MEDICATION ERRORS AND FALLS IN A TEACHING HOSPITAL: CROSS-SECTIONAL STUDY

ABSTRACT Objectives to characterize accidents/falls and medication errors in the care process in a teaching hospital and to determine their root causes and variable direct costs. Method cross-sectional study implemented in two stages: the first, was based on the analysis of secondary sources (notifications, medical records and cost reports) and the second, on the application of root-cause analysis for incidents with moderate/severe harm. The study was carried out in a teaching hospital in Paraná, which exclusively serves the Brazilian Unified Health System and composes the Network of Sentinel Hospitals. Thirty reports of accidents/falls and 37 reports of medication errors were investigated. Descriptive statistical analysis and the methodology proposed by The Joint Commission International were applied. Results among the accidents/falls, 33.3% occurred in the emergency room; 40.0% were related to the bed, in similar proportions in the morning and night periods; 51.4% of medication errors occurred in the hospitalization unit, the majority in the night time (32.4%), with an emphasis on dose omissions (27.0%) and dispensing errors (21.6%). Most incidents did not cause additional harm or cost. The average cost was R$ 158.55 for the management of falls. Additional costs for medication errors ranged from R$ 31.16 to R$ 21,534.61. The contributing factors and root causes of the incidents were mainly related to the team, the professional and the execution of care. Conclusion accidents/falls and medication errors presented a low frequency of harm to the patient, but impacted costs to the hospital. Regarding root causes, aspects of the health work process related to direct patient care were highlighted.

A cross-sectional study of errors in physicians orders' of antiseizure medications among people with epilepsy from rural India

AIMS

To enumerate and classify errors in physicians' orders of antiseizure medications (ASMs) to people with epilepsy presenting to neurology clinic.

METHODS

This cross-sectional study was conducted in the neurology clinic of a teaching hospital catering to a predominantly rural population. People in whom a diagnosis of epilepsy was confirmed and who presented for the first time with a prior prescription for antiseizure medication/s were included. Their immediate previous prescriptions were assessed for errors, enumerated and classified according to WHO guidelines for prescription writing.

RESULTS

Hundred prescriptions of 334 patients screened were analyzed. The number of ASMs prescribed to a participant was 2 ± 0.6 (mean ± SD). We identified a mean of 5 ± 4 (median: 3; range: 1-7) errors in each order. These included superscription errors, e.g., missing information on seizure control and frequency (n = 90, 90%), generic name (n = 62, 62%), patient identifiers (n = 57, 57%), prescribers' identifiers (n = 29, 29%) and diagnosis or indication for prescribing the medication/s (n = 55, 55%). The most common inscription and subscription errors were dosing errors (22%) and pharmaceutical form errors (20%) followed by omission (13%), duplication (13%), substitution (12%), commission (9%) and frequency errors (8%). Errors were more common among prescriptions provided by primary-care and Ayurvedic, Yoga and Naturopathy, Unani, Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH) physicians compared to specialists (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Errors are common among medication orders provided by non-specialist and specialist physicians. Primary care and AYUSH are more liable to make errors underscoring the need to educate them in basic epilepsy treatment.

How human activity impacted manufacturing non-compliances: A multivariate analysis in a centralized cytotoxic preparation unit

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the study was to identify risk factors related to human errors in the preparation of anticancer drugs in order to improve the pharmaceutical process by setting corrective actions.

METHOD

Risk factors which could increase the probability of error were identified: daily workload, workload on the previous day and subcontractors' workload, time slot of the preparation, understaffing, incidents which could affect workflow, individual experience of technicians and cleanrooms layout. Drug reconstitution or complex fabrications were also considered as risk factors. We used univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses to screen for correlation between risks and errors.

RESULT

Among 11 278 preparations analyzed, 115 were non-compliant. Univariate analysis shows significant variables: individual experience of technicians, technicians working in the same cleanrooms and technicians' rotations. 2 technicians are significantly associated with a higher risk of error and 5 with a lower risk. The multivariate analysis confirmed the conclusions of the univariate.

DISCUSSION

As expected, time slot of the manufacture, cleanrooms layout and some technicians increase the risk of error. Surprisingly, technicians' experience led to increase the risk. This study is a first approach to evaluate the human error aspect in non-compliant preparations, in order to optimize security of antineoplastic drugs preparations.

Safety Assessment of the Pharmacotherapy Process at the Nurse and Midwife Level - An Observational Study

Purpose

Pharmacological errors are among the most common in the healthcare system. This study aimed to determine the level of safety of the pharmacotherapy process at the stage performed by nurses and midwives by indicating the key risk factors affecting patients’ safety.

Methods

A group of 1276 nurses and 136 midwives in Poland participated in the study. The survey was conducted in the period from May 2019 to August 2019. The original Nursing Risk in Pharmacotherapy (NURIPH) tool was used.

Results

The Cronbach alpha coefficient was 0.832. The low legibility of the medical orders (item 1) was indicated as the highest risk. A mean of 4.50 means that this factor’s significance is assessed between “very significant” and “significant.” The communication between physician, nurse and midwife, time pressure, and work organization were also rated high (Items 2, 3, and 4). The averages for these factors are higher than 4, so their evaluation is more than “significant.”.

Conclusion

Nurses and midwives involved in the pharmacotherapy process are exposed to many ergonomic factors triggering risk. A huge problem is the lack of readability of medical orders, which may be a factor triggering a medical error.

In-Hospital Patient Safety Events, Healthcare Costs and Utilization: An Analysis from the Incident Reporting System in an Academic Medical Center

The possible association of patient safety events (PSEs) with the costs and utilization remains a concern. In this retrospective analysis, we investigated adult hospitalizations at a medical center between 2010 and 2015 with or without reported PSEs. Administrative and claims data were analyzed to compare the costs and length of stay (LOS) between cases with and without PSEs of the three most common categories during the first 14 days of hospitalization. Two models, including linear regression and propensity score-matched comparison, were performed for each reference day group of hospitalizations. Of 14,181 PSEs from 424,635 hospitalizations, 69.8% were near miss or no-harm events. Costs and LOS were similar between fall cases and controls in all of the 14 reference days. In contrast, for cases of tube and line events and controls, there were consistent differences in costs and LOS in the majority of the reference days (86% and 57%, respectively). Consistent differences were less frequently seen for medication events and control events (36% and 43%, respectively). Our study approach of comparing cases with PSEs and those without any PSE showed significant differences in costs and LOS for tube and line events, and medication events. No difference in cost or LOS was found regarding fall events. Further studies exploring adjustments for event risks and harm-oriented analysis are warranted.

Drug-Related Problems Identified During Pharmacy Intervention and Consultation: Implementation of an Intensive Care Unit Pharmaceutical Care Model

Aim

To identify common drug-related problems (DRPs) during pharmacy intervention and consultation in an intensive care unit (ICU); to explore the gap between physicians and pharmacists on their understanding of each other’s capabilities and needs.

Method

We conducted a single-center prospective study in the ICU of a tertiary academic hospital for 21 months. A pharmaceutical care (PC) model was implemented by a pharmacy team, and data were collected during pharmacy intervention and consultation. Data analysis was performed on identified DRPs, causes and their relationships. DRPs’ frequency during intervention and consultation was compared. Problem-level descriptive analysis and network analysis were conducted using R 3.6.3.

Result

Implementation of PC model greatly improved the efficacy of pharmacists in both interventions proposed to solve DRPs (from 13.6 to 20.1 cases per month) and number of patients being closely monitored (from 7.7 to 16.9 per month). Pharmacists identified 427 DRPs during pharmacy intervention with primarily adverse drug events (ADEs, 34.7%) and effect of treatment not optimal (25.5%), and 245 DRPs during consultation (mainly ADEs, 58.4%). About three-fifths DRPs were caused by antibiotics. Comparing DRPs identified during pharmacy intervention and consultation, physicians consulted pharmacists more on questions related to medication safety, while pharmacists also paid attention to treatment effectiveness, which was consulted less commonly.

Conclusion

Implementation of PC model is beneficial in guiding pharmacy practice and improving efficacy especially under limited human resources. Physicians and pharmacists shall continue ensuring drug safety and be familiar with the scope of PC and clinical need for a better cooperation.

Collaboration between cardiologist and clinical pharmacist on prescription quality: What is the potential clinical impact for cardiology patients?

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to determine the effect of pharmacists' interventions (PI) on the potential clinical impact of medication errors, including the lack of therapeutic optimisation of patients with cardiologic diseases, such as heart failure and acute coronary syndrome).

METHODS

This was an observational, prospective study conducted in the cardiology department of a French university hospital centre for a duration of 9 months. All prescriptions were analysed and PI were registered for clinical rating by pharmacists and cardiologist.

RESULTS

A total of 532 PI cases were recorded in 339 patients, with a mean of 1.57 (±1.04) PI. The PI acceptance rate was 98.1%. "Dose adjustment" and "introduction therapy" were the most common interventions and represented 38.0% and 32.9%, respectively, of all PI. Statins were the most frequently involved drugs (18.1%), followed by ACE (Angiotensin Converting Enzyme) inhibitors (10.9%) and antiplatelet agents (9.3%). Moreover, 13.8% of PI potentially avoided a severe or very severe clinical impact (n = 71) and 38.6% had a significant impact altering the quality of life (n = 198). There was no significant difference between the average score performed by the clinical pharmacist included in the cardiology team and the one obtained by the cardiologist (P = .797). In contrast, a significant difference was observed for the average score established by the pharmacist localised in central pharmacy versus the rating of the cardiologist (P < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

The collaboration between clinical pharmacists and cardiologists in the medical units seems to be beneficial to the quality of prescriptions, including the implementation of recommendations. The good rate of PI acceptance and the similar rating with the cardiologist show that there is a change in perspective of the pharmacist, being closer to the clinical reality.

Cost-consequence analysis of self-administration of medication during hospitalization: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial in a Danish hospital setting

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to evaluate the costs and consequences of introducing "self-administration of medication" (SAM) during hospitalization as compared with nurse-led dispensing and administration of medication.

METHODS

This pragmatic randomized controlled trial was performed in a Danish Cardiology Unit. Patients ⩾18 years old capable of self-administering medication were eligible. In the intervention group, patients self-administered their medication. In the control group, medication was dispensed and administered by nurses. The implementation of SAM was used to evaluate the cost-consequences. The micro-costing analysis used the hospital perspective and a short-term incremental costing approach. The costs for medication, materials, and nursing time were included. Consequences included the dispensing error proportion, patients' perceptions regarding medication, satisfaction, and deviations in the medication list at follow-up. In addition, the number of readmissions and general practitioner (GP) contacts within 30 days after discharge was included.

RESULTS

The total cost (TC) per patient in the intervention group was 49.9€ (95% CI: 46.6-53.2) compared with 52.6€ (95% CI: 46.6-58.6) in the control group. The difference between the groups was not statistically significant (p = 0.09). Sensitivity analysis consistently showed TCs favoring the intervention. The dispensing error proportion was 9.7% (95% CI: 7.9-11.6) in the intervention group compared with 12.8% (95% CI: 10.9-15.6) in the control group. The difference was statistically significant (p = 0.02). The analysis also found changes in the perceptions regarding medication (indicating higher medication adherence), increased satisfaction, and fewer patients with deviations in the medication list at follow-up. No statistically significant differences between the groups in relation to readmissions and GP contacts within 30 days were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

SAM seems to cost less although the cost difference was small and not statistically significant. As SAM had positive effects on patient outcomes, the results indicate that SAM may be cost-effective.

PLAIN LANGUAGE SUMMARY

Self-administration of medication: a research study of the costs and consequences Objectives To evaluate the costs and consequences of introducing "self-administration of medication" (SAM) during hospitalization compared to medication dispensed by nurses. Methods This research study included patients ≥18 years capable of self-administering medication and was performed in a Danish cardiology unit. Patients self-administered their own medication during hospitalization in the intervention group, whereas nurses dispensed and administered the medication in the control group. Patients were allocated between groups by randomization. The costs of SAM were analyzed from a hospital perspective and included costs for medication, materials, and nursing time. The consequences included the proportion of dispensing errors, patients' perceptions regarding medication, patient satisfaction, deviations in the medication list at follow-up, the number of readmissions and general practitioner (GP) contacts within 30 days after discharge. Results The total cost per patient was 49.9€ in the intervention group compared to 52.6€ in the control group (p = 0.09). The cost difference between groups was not significant. The proportion of dispensing errors was significantly lower in the intervention group compared to the control group. In addition the research study found changes in the perceptions regarding medication, increased satisfaction, and fewer patients with deviations in the medication list at follow-up. For readmissions and GP contacts within 30 days no significant differences between groups were found. Conclusion SAM cost less or equal to medication dispensing and administration by nurse. SAM had positive impacts on patient outcomes. Therefore, SAM may be cost-effective.

Medication errors in outpatient pharmacies: comparison of an electronic and a paper-based prescription system

Objectives

Medication errors are among the most common medical errors. They can result in mortality, morbidity and additional healthcare costs. Surveillance of medication errors is encouraged to identify gaps in the healthcare system and work on them. This study aimed to compare medication errors in outpatient prescriptions in two hospitals in Jordan: one with a paper-based and one with an electronic prescription system.

Methods

This was a cross-sectional observational study in two large hospitals in Jordan over a three-month period. Prescribing and dispensing of medicines were screened for medication errors in both centres: 2500 prescriptions were screened in each hospital.

Key findings

In the hospital with electronic prescriptions, of the 2500 prescriptions screened, 631 medication errors were detected: 231 (36.6%) prescription errors and 400 (63.4%) dispensing errors. In the hospital with paper-based prescriptions, 3714 medication errors were found: 288 (7.8%) prescription errors and 3426 (92.2%) dispensing errors. The most common prescription and dispensing errors in electronic prescriptions were, respectively, prescription of drugs that could have a drug–drug interaction, and omitting to dispense a drug on the prescription. In the paper prescriptions, the most common prescription and dispensing errors were, respectively, inappropriate dose/quantity/frequency or route of administration, and inappropriate and/or inadequate labelling of medication when dispensed, of which there were a large number (2496 (67.2%)).

Conclusion

This study highlights the effect of the prescription system used by hospitals. Fewer medication errors were found in the electronic system. Healthcare policymakers, professionals and administrators are encouraged to invest in electronic systems to minimize medication errors.

Economic analysis of the prevalence and clinical and economic burden of medication error in England

OBJECTIVES

To provide national estimates of the number and clinical and economic burden of medication errors in the National Health Service (NHS) in England.

METHODS

We used UK-based prevalence of medication errors (in prescribing, dispensing, administration and monitoring) in primary care, secondary care and care home settings, and associated healthcare resource use, to estimate annual number and burden of errors to the NHS. Burden (healthcare resource use and deaths) was estimated from harm associated with avoidable adverse drug events (ADEs).

RESULTS

We estimated that 237 million medication errors occur at some point in the medication process in England annually, 38.4% occurring in primary care; 72% have little/no potential for harm and 66 million are potentially clinically significant. Prescribing in primary care accounts for 34% of all potentially clinically significant errors. Definitely avoidable ADEs are estimated to cost the NHS £98 462 582 per year, consuming 181 626 bed-days, and causing/contributing to 1708 deaths. This comprises primary care ADEs leading to hospital admission (£83.7 million; causing 627 deaths), and secondary care ADEs leading to longer hospital stay (£14.8 million; causing or contributing to 1081 deaths).

CONCLUSIONS

Ubiquitous medicines use in health care leads unsurprisingly to high numbers of medication errors, although most are not clinically important. There is significant uncertainty around estimates due to the assumption that avoidable ADEs correspond to medication errors, data quality, and lack of data around longer-term impacts of errors. Data linkage between errors and patient outcomes is essential to progress understanding in this area.

Implementation and comparison of two text mining methods with a standard pharmacovigilance method for signal detection of medication errors

Background

Medication errors have been identified as the most common preventable cause of adverse events. The lack of granularity in medication error terminology has led pharmacovigilance experts to rely on information in individual case safety reports’ (ICSRs) codes and narratives for signal detection, which is both time consuming and labour intensive. Thus, there is a need for complementary methods for the detection of medication errors from ICSRs. The aim of this study is to evaluate the utility of two natural language processing text mining methods as complementary tools to the traditional approach followed by pharmacovigilance experts for medication error signal detection.

Methods

The safety surveillance advisor (SSA) method, I2E text mining and University of Copenhagen Center for Protein Research (CPR) text mining, were evaluated for their ability to extract cases containing a type of medication error where patients extracted insulin from a prefilled pen or cartridge by a syringe. A total of 154,209 ICSRs were retrieved from Novo Nordisk’s safety database from January 1987 to February 2018. Each method was evaluated by recall (sensitivity) and precision (positive predictive value).

Results

We manually annotated 2533 ICSRs to investigate whether these contained the sought medication error. All these ICSRs were then analysed using the three methods. The recall was 90.4, 88.1 and 78.5% for the CPR text mining, the SSA method and the I2E text mining, respectively. Precision was low for all three methods ranging from 3.4% for the SSA method to 1.9 and 1.6% for the CPR and I2E text mining methods, respectively.

Conclusions

Text mining methods can, with advantage, be used for the detection of complex signals relying on information found in unstructured text (e.g., ICSR narratives) as standardised and both less labour-intensive and time-consuming methods compared to traditional pharmacovigilance methods. The employment of text mining in pharmacovigilance need not be limited to the surveillance of potential medication errors but can be used for the ongoing regulatory requests, e.g., obligations in risk management plans and may thus be utilised broadly for signal detection and ongoing surveillance activities.

Self-administration of medication: a pragmatic randomized controlled trial of the impact on dispensing errors, perceptions, and satisfaction

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to investigate whether self-administration of medication (SAM) during hospitalization affects the number of dispensing errors, perceptions regarding medication, and participant satisfaction when compared with nurse-led medication dispensing.

METHODS

A pragmatic randomized controlled trial was performed in a Danish cardiology unit. Patients aged ⩾ 18 years capable of SAM were eligible for inclusion. Patients were excluded if they did not self-administer medication at home, were not prescribed medication suitable for self-administration, or did not speak Danish.Intervention group participants self-administered their medication. In the control group, medication was dispensed and administered by nurses.The primary outcome was the proportion of dispensing errors collected through modified disguised observation of participants and nurses. Dispensing errors were divided into clinical and procedural errors.Secondary outcomes were explored through telephone calls to determine participant perceptions regarding medication and satisfaction, and finally, deviations in their medication list two weeks after discharge.

RESULTS

Significantly fewer dispensing errors were observed in the intervention group, with 100 errors/1033 opportunities for error (9.7%), compared with 132 errors/1028 opportunities for error (12.8%) in the control group. The number of clinical errors was significantly reduced, whereas no difference in procedural errors was observed. At follow up, those who were self-administering medication had fewer concerns regarding their medication, found medication to be less harmful, were more satisfied, preferred this opportunity in the future, and had fewer deviations in their medication list after discharge compared with the control group.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the reduced number of dispensing errors in the intervention group, indicate that SAM is safe. In addition, SAM had a positive impact on (a) perceptions regarding medication, thus suggesting increased medication adherence, (b) deviations in medication list after discharge, and (c) participant satisfaction related to medication management at the hospital.

Out of sight: a lesson in drug errors

A 76-year-old man developed recurrent encephalopathy, visual disturbance, myoclonus, generalised seizures and atonic drop attacks on a background of a gastrectomy for adenocarcinoma and stable chronic lymphocytic leukaemia. He presented to three different hospitals and was admitted twice, with normal investigations. His symptoms transiently improved during each admission (and with starting levetiracetam) but recurred each time on hospital discharge. Subsequent careful inspection of his medication box identified that his community pharmacy had in error been dispensing baclofen 80 mg per day instead of his prescribed Buscopan 80 mg per day. This case highlights the importance of physically inspecting a patient's medications and emphasises the spectrum of baclofen-related toxicity; it also highlights potential deficiencies in the pharmacy dispensary process and the need for multiple checks by patients and professionals.

Clinical utility of a targeted smartphone application to aid veterinary students in calculating constant rate infusions and perioperative fluid drip rates

BACKGROUND

To compare the utility of a targeted smartphone application (TSPA) with a non-programmable calculator (NPC) when calculating fluid drip rates (FDR) and constant rate infusions (CRIs).

METHODS

In a prospective randomised clinical study, 48 fourth-year veterinary students entered one of four parallel groups involving two mock scenarios: fentanyl calculation using an NPC followed by lidocaine calculation using a TSPA, fentanyl (TSPA) followed by lidocaine (NPC), lidocaine (NPC) followed by fentanyl (TSPA) or lidocaine (TSPA) followed by fentanyl (NPC). Students calculated volume of drug added to maintenance fluids and drops/second that correctly administered the drug dose and FDR. Time to completion was assessed using an analysis of variance. A Fisher's exact test assessed the effect of study period, scenario and device in the proportion of correct/incorrect answers.

RESULTS

Participants took longer to complete the scenarios in period 1 and 2 with the NPC (380.7±195.6 seconds and 488±154.8 seconds, respectively) than the TSPA (247.5±88.8 seconds and 224±94.2 seconds, respectively) (P<0.0031 and P<0.0001). Participants were more likely to complete the scenarios incorrectly with the NPC (n=32) when compared with the TSPA (n=7) (P<0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

TSPAs are more efficient and accurate when calculating CRIs and FDR compared with conventional methods. Medical mathematics must be emphasised during the veterinary curriculum.

The Risks and Outcomes Resulting From Medication Errors Reported in the Finnish Tertiary Care Units:: A Cross-Sectional Retrospective Register Study

Background: Hospital-acquired medication errors (MEs) are common in health care. Although voluntary reporting is criticized for not producing reliable estimates on ME frequency, it provides valuable knowledge on errors occurring in the medication process. Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze and determine the risks and outcomes resulting from MEs related to the TOP15 medicines in the Finnish tertiary care units from July 2016 to July 2017. Methods: The data consisting of 1,447 ME reports was organized according to ATC classification, after which TOP15 medicines involved in the reports were selected. Inductive content analysis was performed to the reports. After this, the reports were categorized by ME outcome into five categories and further analyzed accordingly. Results: The most common ME outcome in the reports was "omitted medicine" (33.9%). More than a quarter (27.1%) of ME reports were estimated to cause moderate or severe risk to the patient. When compared with each other, none of the outcome groups were more susceptible to high-risk events (p = 0.71). Of the TOP15 medicines, only Norepinephrine had significantly higher risk of being involved in high-risk events (OR 2.43, 95%CI 1.35-4.61). Conclusion: Voluntary reporting has an important role in the development of medication safety and the overall medication process within organizations. Although majority of the TOP15 medicines were involved in MEs resulting in seemingly high-risk outcomes, they were estimated to be insignificant or minor within the reporting unit. In the future, more emphasis will be needed for the assessment and analysis of the reports for more efficient, real-time detection and response to signals from health care units.

Cost-saving medication therapy management for outpatients

Objective:

Medication costs comprise the majority of health system budgets and continue to increase faster than other health-care expenditures. The objective of this study is to evaluate the causes and monetary value of cost-saving prescription interventions made by clinical pharmacists in outpatient pharmacy.

Materials and Methods:

Outpatient prescriptions were randomly audited for a period of 11 months (August 2017–June 2018) using a customized outpatient prescription audit tool integrated with computerized physician order entry. Drug-related problems were communicated to respective prescribers, and their response to each intervention was documented in accordance with PCNE classification. Both unit dose cost and anticipated dose cost savings were calculated to evaluate the monetary benefit for patients.

Results:

Unit dose cost of INR 4875.73 and anticipated dose cost of INR 26890.8 were saved from outpatients. Majority of the prescribing errors were associated with therapeutic duplication (43.4%) and drug interaction (25.7%) that account for anticipated dose cost savings of INR 17812.65 for patients. Major contributory drug classes that reduced the cost of therapy were antibiotics (24.23%), proton-pump inhibitors (13.27%), and analgesics (12.34%). Prescribers' response to pharmacist intervention varied, 53% responded to stop the drug, 21% responded to change the brand, and 20% changed the frequency of administration. Necessary instructions were verbally given to patients without making any modification in the prescription for 3.2% (n = 10) of cost-saving interventions.

Discussion and Conclusion:

As clinical pharmacist has the expertise to detect, resolve, and prevent medication errors, the development of clinical pharmacy practice in a hospital outpatient pharmacy will have a significant impact on reducing prescription errors and health-care cost also.

Economic evaluations of pharmacist-led medication review in outpatients with hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus, and dyslipidaemia: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the health economics evidence based on randomized controlled trials of pharmacist-led medication review in pharmacotherapy managed cardiovascular disease risk factors, specifically, hypertension, type-2 diabetes mellitus and dyslipidaemia in ambulatory settings and to provide recommendations for future evaluations.

METHODS

A systematic review was carried out according to the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. PubMed (Medline), Scopus, Web of Science, National Health System Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED), Cochrane Library, and Econlit were searched and screened by two independent authors. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was the main outcome. Risk of bias was assessed with the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care tool by the Cochrane Collaboration. Economic evaluation quality was assessed with the he Consensus Health Economic Criteria list (CHEC list).

RESULTS

5636 records were found, and 174 were retrieved for full-text review yielding 11 articles. Eight articles deemed the intervention as cost effective and two as dominant. Two cost-utility analyses were performed yielding ICERs of $612.7 and $59.8 per QALY. Four articles were considered to perform a high-quality economic evaluation and four had a low risk of bias. Future economic evaluations should consider cost-utility analysis, to describe usual care thoroughly, and use time horizons that capture the effect of cardiovascular disease prevention, a societal perspective and uncertainty analysis.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacist-led medication review has proven to be cost effective in various studies in different settings. Policy decision makers are advised to undertake local economic evaluations reflecting the gaps observed in this systematic review and published literature. If this is not possible, a transferability assessment should be conducted.

Medication reconciliation: time to save? A cross-sectional study from one acute hospital

PURPOSE

Medication errors during transitional care are an important patient safety issue. Medication reconciliation is an established intervention to reduce such errors. Current evidence has not demonstrated an associated reduction in healthcare costs, however, with complexity and resource intensity being identified as issues. The aims of this study were to examine an existing process of medication reconciliation in terms of time taken, to identify factors associated with additional time, and to determine if additional time is associated with detecting errors of clinical significance.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted. Issues arising during medication reconciliation incurring a time burden additional to the usual process were logged and quantified by pharmacists. Regression analyses investigated associations between patient characteristics and clinically significant errors and additional time. Cost for additional time in terms of hospital pharmacist salary was calculated.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine patients were included. Having a personal record of medication at admission (OR 3.30, 95% CI: (1.05 to 10.42), p = 0.004) was a significant predictor of additional time. No significant associations were found between the occurrence of clinically significant error and additional time (p > 0.05). The most common reason for additional time was clarifying issues pertaining to primary care medication information. Projected annual 5-year costs for the mean additional time of 3.75 min were €1.8-1.9 million.

CONCLUSIONS

Spending additional time on medication reconciliation is associated with economic burden and may not yield benefit in terms of capturing clinically significant errors. There is a need to improve communication of medication information between primary and secondary care.

Impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation on admission to internal medicine service: experience in two tertiary care teaching hospitals

BACKGROUND

The Institute for Healthcare Improvement identifies medication reconciliation as the shared responsibility of nurses, pharmacists, and physicians, where each has a defined role. The study aims to assess the clinical impact of pharmacy-led medication reconciliation performed on day one of hospital admission to the internal medicine service.

METHODS

This is a pilot prospective study conducted at two tertiary care teaching hospitals in Lebanon. Student pharmacists who were properly trained and closely supervised, collected the medication history, and pharmacists at the corresponding sites performed the reconciliation process. Interventions related to the unintended discrepancies were relayed to the medical team. The main outcome was the number of unintended discrepancies identified. The time needed for medication history, and the information sources used to complete the Best Possible Medication History were also assessed. The unintended discrepancies were classified by medication class and route of medication administration, by potential severity, and by proximal cause leading to the discrepancy. For the bivariate and multivariable analysis, the dependent variable was the incidence of unintended discrepancies. The "total number of unintended discrepancies" was dichotomized into yes (≥ 1 unintended discrepancy) or no (0 unintended discrepancies). Independent variables tested for their association with the dependent variable consisted of the following: gender, age, creatinine clearance, number of home medications, allergies, previous adverse drug reactions, and number of information sources used to obtain the BPMH. Results were assumed to be significant when p was < 0.05.

RESULTS

During the study period, 204 patients were included, and 195 unintended discrepancies were identified. The most common discrepancies consisted of medication omission (71.8%), and the most common agents involved were dietary supplements (27.7%). Around 36% of the unintended discrepancies were judged as clinically significant, and only 1% were judged as serious. The most common interventions included the addition of a medication (71.8%) and the adjustment of a dose (12.8%). The number of home medications was significantly associated with the occurrence of unintended discrepancies (ORa = 1.11 (1.03-1.19) p = 0.007).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacy-led medication reconciliation upon admission, along with student pharmacist involvement and physician communication can reduce unintended discrepancies and improve medication safety and patient outcomes.

Medication related litigation in Ireland: A 6-year review

AIMS

The primary aims of the study were to identify those medications most frequently associated with clinical litigation in Ireland and to quantify the cost of such litigation. Secondary aims were to identify where in the medication-use process claims were most likely to arise, the medication incident types involved and the primary injury alleged.

METHODS

The National Incident Management System (NIMS) for incident and claims management was searched to identify all medication-related claims finalised from 2011 to 2016 (inclusive). The physical case files were obtained and additional data not available on NIMS was extracted in order to build a detailed picture of the incident and subsequent claim.

RESULTS

The search identified 79 relevant claims, of which 48 closed with a payment to the plaintiff. These 48 claims involved 54 medications. Medication groups identified included general anaesthetics (n = 7), opioids (n = 6), penicillins, antithrombotics and local anaesthetics (all n = 5). The errors alleged occurred exclusively at the administration (58%) and prescribing (42%) stages of the medication-use process. Medication incident types included wrong dose/strength (n = 17), wrong drug (n = 7) and adverse drug reaction (n = 6). The most commonly pleaded primary injuries were allergic reaction (n = 9), deterioration in clinical status (n = 9) and post-traumatic stress disorder (n = 8). The median total cost of these claims was €60 991, including median damages of €33 858.

CONCLUSIONS

This study links data on medication incidents, actual harm to patients and litigation costs. Thus, it presents a comprehensive picture of the consequences of medication error.

Drug-drug interactions and pharmacists' interventions among psychiatric patients in outpatient clinics of a teaching hospital in Saudi Arabia

Background

Lack of recognition of labeled drug-drug interactions (DDIs) is a type of medication error of particular relevance to the treatment of psychiatric patients. Pharmacists are in a position to detect and address potential DDIs.

Objective

This study aimed to explore pharmacists' role in the identification and management of DDIs among psychiatric patients in psychiatric outpatient clinics of a university-affiliated tertiary care hospital in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Method

This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional medical chart review of patients visiting outpatient psychiatric clinics. It utilized medical records of patients who were taking any psychotropic medications and were prescribed at least one additional drug. The hospital Computerized Physician Order Entry system was used to identify DDIs and determine the pharmacists' interventions. The Beers criteria were applied to detect inappropriate prescribing among older patients.

Results

On average, the pharmacists intervened in 12 out of 213 (5.6%) cases of major or moderate DDIs. Older age, higher number of prescription medications, the severity of DDIs, and the utilization of lithium and anticoagulants were positively associated with the pharmacist undertaking an action.

Conclusion

Future studies should explore the prevalence rate of harmful DDIs among psychiatric patients on a large scale and examine the effectiveness of different pharmacy policies in the detection and management of DDIs.

Validation of a mobile app for reducing errors of administration of medications in an emergency

Medication errors occur frequently and are a risk to patient safety. To reduce mistakes in the medication process in emergencies, a mobile app has been developed supporting the calculation of doses and administration of drugs. A simulation study was performed to validate the app as a tool to reduce medication errors. This was a randomised crossover study conducted in the Academic Hospital. The participants included were residents and attendings in anaesthesiology. 74 Participants performed four simulation scenarios in which they had to calculate and administer drugs for emergencies. Two scenarios were performed with the app ("app scenarios") and the other two scenarios were performed without the use of the app ("control scenarios"). The order of drugs, simulation patients and usage of aid were randomized. The accuracy of administered drug doses were measured. Medications were categorised as either "accurate" ([Formula: see text]% of target dosage) or "wrong" (less than 50% or more than 200% of target dosage). The dosage calculated and the dosage administered were documented separately to differentiate between calculation and handling errors. During app scenarios, there were no "wrong" dosages, whereas 6.8 (95% CI 2.7-10.8%) of dosages in control scenarios were evaluated as "wrong". The probability of giving an "accurate" dosage was increased from 77.7 (70.9-84.5%) in control scenarios to 93.9 (90-97.8%) in app scenarios. Calculation errors were the main cause for wrong dosing. The app is an appropriate and feasible tool to reduce calculation and handling errors and may increase patient safety.

[Medication safety in hospitals : Integration of clinical pharmacists to reduce drug-related problems in the inpatient setting]

Drug-related problems (DRPs) are a significant and often preventable cause for morbidity and mortality. Hospitalization is associated with a high risk for DRPs, especially due to a lack of information transfer at transitions of care. At the same time, interventions during inpatient treatment usually require a change in drug therapy and additionally increase the risk of DRPs. Thereby, DRPs can occur at all levels of the medication process and can be caused by different groups of professionals. One way to improve medication safety in hospitals is to integrate clinical pharmacists into the medication process.According to available data, the integration of a clinical pharmacist in multi-professional teams during admission, hospitalization and discharge can significantly reduce DRPs, costs and increases efficacy of drug therapy. In addition, drug supply with unit-dose systems in combination with digitalization of the medication process can achieve an improvement in medication safety. Improvement in continuity of medical care through a structured medication review and seamless transmission of medically relevant information upon discharge contribute to a significant reduction of hospital readmissions and emergency admissions due to ABPs, as well as health costs. With a university education, the hospital pharmacist specialized in clinical pharmacy is the only professional group that can comprehensively support the physician in the field of drug therapy.

A modified Delphi study to determine the level of consensus across the European Union on the structures, processes and desired outcomes of the management of polypharmacy in older people

BACKGROUND

Inappropriate use of multiple medicines (inappropriate polypharmacy) is a major challenge in older people with consequences of increased prevalence and severity of adverse drug reactions and interactions, and reduced medicines adherence. The aim of this study was to determine the levels of consensus amongst key stakeholders in the European Union (EU) in relation to aspects of the management of polypharmacy in older people.

METHODS

Forty-six statements were developed on aspects of healthcare structures, processes and desired outcomes, with consensus defined at ≥ 80% agreement. Panel members were strategists (e.g. directors, leading clinicians and commissioners) from each of the 28 EU member states, with a target recruitment of five per member state. Three Delphi rounds were conducted via email, with panel members being provided with summative results and collated, anonymised comments at the commencement of Rounds 2 and 3.

RESULTS

Ninety panel members were recruited (64.3% of target), with high participation levels throughout the three Delphi rounds (91.1%, 83.3%, 72.2%). During Round 1, consensus was obtained for 27/46 statements (58.7%), with an additional two statements in Round 2 and none in Round 3. Consensus was obtained for statements relating to: potential gain arising from polypharmacy management (3/4 statements); strategic development (7/7); change management (5/7) indicator measures (4/6); legislation (0/3); awareness raising (5/5); polypharmacy reviews (5/7); and EU vision (0/7). Analysis of free text comments indicated that the vision statements were too ambitious and not achievable by the specified timeframe of 2025.

CONCLUSION

Consensus was obtained amongst key EU strategists around many aspects of polypharmacy management in older people. Notably, no consensus was achieved in relation to statements relating to the need to alter legislation in areas of healthcare delivery, remuneration and practitioner scope of practice. While the vision for the EU by 2025 was considered rather ambitious, there is great potential and clear opportunity to advance polypharmacy management throughout the EU and beyond.