Improving medication error identification with an inpatient maternal-fetal medicine pharmacist

Analysis of prescribing error and pharmacist's intervention on obstetrics and gynaecology outpatient prescriptions in a Malaysian tertiary hospital

Prescribing error in obstetrics and gynaecology (O&G) poses harm to women and potentially to the foetus and new born. Pharmacists' interventions have been reported to prevent prescribing error from reaching the patients. Little is reported on the magnitude of prescribing error and pharmacist intervention in a subspecialised outpatient O&G setting. This study aimed to identify the prevalence of prescribing error and pharmacists' interventions at the O&G outpatient setting. This retrospective study involved screening of prescriptions for commission and omission errors. Acceptance, clinical significance and rationale for pharmacists' interventions were analysed. Of the 3883 prescriptions screened, 359 (9.2%) prescriptions contained prescribing error, mainly (52.4%) due to commission errors. Among the 395 interventions performed by the pharmacists, 207 (52.4%) were recorded for omission errors. All the interventions were accepted by the prescribers with 65.1% were categorised as 'very significant'. About 54% of the interventions were conducted to optimise treatment outcome. The prevalence of prescribing error and pharmacists' interventions on O&G outpatient prescriptions was found to be substantial in this study. Standard prescription writing guideline should be routinely regulated, monitored and educated among healthcare professionals. Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Prescribing error rate in O&G was found lowest in outpatient setting as compared to inpatient and high risk settings. Pharmacists' intervention performed at the centralised inpatient pharmacy unit or on-ward has shown to reduce prescribing error in inpatient settings.What do the results of this study add? This study identified that the prescribing error rate in a subspecialised outpatient O&G setting was within the range reported in high risk O&G settings. The number of prescriptions to pharmacists' intervention ratio of 9.8:1 was reported.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Further research, preferably qualitative in nature, is recommended to explore, identify and address the factors that may hinder clear, accurate and complete prescription writing practices.

Evaluating the role of clinical pharmacist in the detection and reduction of medication errors in a specialized burn unit

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the frequency and types of medication errors and the role of clinical pharmacist in the reduction of medication errors in a burn unit.

METHODS

The clinical pharmacist monitored medication use process in all patients admitted to the burn unit in the 4-month interventional study. Direct observation and chart review methods were used to detect medication errors. Medication errors were classified according to the classification of American Society of Health-system Pharmacists. The seriousness of medication errors was categorized based on the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention index.

RESULTS

During the study, 1653 drugs were prescribed to 94 patients. Totally, 259 medication errors were identified. The rates of medication errors were 2.75 errors/patient, 0.16 errors/ordered medication, and 0.98 errors/prescription. The most common type of errors was prescribing error (61.8%) followed by dispensing error (14.7%). Regarding the seriousness of medication errors, 1.9%, 21.6%, 45.9%, 30.1%, and 0.4% of errors were in the categories B, C, D, E, and F, respectively. Antibiotics had the highest rate of errors. Of all detected medication errors, 64.5% were intercepted or corrected by the clinical pharmacist interventions.

CONCLUSION

Medication errors were not rare in the burn unit. Providing clinical pharmacy services to burn patients to reduce the incidence of medication errors is highly recommended.