The effect of prescriber education on medication-related patient harm in the hospital: a systematic review

Risks in the analogue and digitally-supported medication process and potential solutions to increase patient safety in the hospital: A mixed methods study

BACKGROUND

In hospital medication errors are common. Our aim was to investigate risks of the analogue and digitally-supported medication process and any potential solutions.

METHODS

A mixed methods study including a structured literature search and online questionnaires based on the Delphi method was conducted. First, all risks were structured into main and sub-risks and second, risks were grouped into risk clusters. Third, healthcare experts assessed risk clusters regarding their likelihood of occurrence their possible impact on patient safety. Experts were also asked to estimate the potential for digital solutions and solutions that strengthen the competence of healthcare professionals.

RESULTS

Overall, 160 main risks and 542 sub-risks were identified. Main risks were grouped into 43 risk clusters. 33 healthcare experts (56% female, 50% with >20 years professional-experience) ranked the likelihood of occurrence and the impact on patient safety in the top 15 risk clusters regarding the process steps: admission (n = 4), prescribing (n = 3), verifying (n = 1), preparing/dispensing (n = 3), administering (n = 1), discharge (n = 1), healthcare professional competence (n = 1), and patient adherence (n = 1). 28 healthcare experts (64% female, 43% with >20 years professional-experience) mostly suggested awareness building and training, strengthened networking, and involvement of pharmacists at point-of-care as likely solutions to strengthen healthcare professional competence. For digital solutions they primarily suggested a digital medication list, digital warning systems, barcode-technology, and digital support in integrated care.

CONCLUSIONS

The medication process holds a multitude of potential risks, in both the analogue and the digital medication process. Different solutions to strengthen healthcare professional competence and in the area of digitalization were identified that could help increase patient safety and minimize possible errors.

Evaluation of prescriptions from tertiary care hospitals across India for deviations from treatment guidelines & their potential consequences

BACKGROUND OBJECTIVES

Irrational prescribing practices have major consequences on patient safety and also increase the economic burden. Real-life examples of impact of irrational prescription have potential to improve prescribing practices. In this context, the present study aimed to capture and evaluate the prevalence of deviations from treatment guidelines in the prescriptions, potential consequence/s of the deviations and corrective actions recommended by clinicians.

METHODS

It was a cross-sectional observational study conducted in the outpatient departments of tertiary care hospitals in India wherein the 13 Indian Council of Medical Research Rational Use of Medicines Centres are located. Prescriptions not compliant with the standard treatment guidelines and incomplete prescriptions with respect to formulation, dose, duration and frequency were labelled as 'prescriptions having deviations'. A deviation that could result in a drug interaction, lack of response, increased cost, preventable adverse drug reaction (ADR) and/or antimicrobial resistance was labelled as an 'unacceptable deviation'.

RESULTS

Against all the prescriptions assessed, about one tenth of them (475/4838; 9.8%) had unacceptable deviations. However, in 2667/4838 (55.1%) prescriptions, the clinicians had adhered to the treatment guidelines. Two thousand one hundred and seventy-one prescriptions had deviations, of which 475 (21.9%) had unacceptable deviations with pantoprazole (n=54), rabeprazole+domperidone (n=35) and oral enzyme preparations (n=24) as the most frequently prescribed drugs and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI) and hypertension as most common diseases with unacceptable deviations. The potential consequences of deviations were increase in cost (n=301), ADRs (n=254), drug interactions (n=81), lack of therapeutic response (n=77) and antimicrobial resistance (n=72). Major corrective actions proposed for consideration were issuance of an administrative order (n=196) and conducting online training programme (n=108).

INTERPRETATION CONCLUSIONS

The overall prevalence of deviations found was 45 per cent of which unacceptable deviations was estimated to be 9.8 per cent. To minimize the deviations, clinicians recommended online training on rational prescribing and administrative directives as potential interventions.

Handwritten prescription practices in a public hospital in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya: a best practice implementation project

BACKGROUND

Prescription writing error is a common phenomenon in the health sector. Appropriate handwritten prescription practices minimize medical errors during medical drug dispensing.

OBJECTIVES

This project aimed to identify the extent to which clinicians adhere to handwritten drug prescription best practices and implement evidence-based strategies to improve compliance with handwritten prescription best practices in an outpatient department.

METHODS

The project was conceptually informed by the JBI Model of Evidence-Based Health care and the JBI Evidence Implementation Framework. Baseline and follow-up audit data were collected and analyzed using JBI's Practical Application of Clinical Evidence System (PACES) software. The JBI Getting Research into Practice (GRiP) program was used to identify potential barriers and design intervention strategies. The project was conducted in a public hospital outpatient department in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya.

RESULTS

There was a 100% improvement in compliance with the number of prescribers who had received education on essential features of a handwritten drug prescription. High compliance was observed in prescriptions that indicated the patient name (99%) and date of prescription (98%) in the follow-up audit. Approximately half of the prescriptions included a diagnosis of the disease in both the baseline and the follow-up audit. However, in the follow-up audit, only 21% of the prescriptions had legible handwriting and 27% prescribed drugs using the generic drug name.

CONCLUSION

Regular audits and dissemination of audit findings through continuous medical education, hospital communication forums, and notices improved compliance with the number of prescriptions that contained the patient identifier and the date of prescription.

Barriers and facilitators influencing the management of academic detailing programs: A descriptive analysis of four programs

BACKGROUND

Educating prescribers is a key strategy to reduce inappropriate prescribing in selection, dose, type, timing, and duration. Academic detailing (AD) is a form of continuing medical education to educate prescribers. AD programs have been established in Canada, Australia, the United States, and other countries. Each program operates uniquely to reflect its local context and resources. It remains unclear how AD programs in universal health care systems differ from each other in their program components and experiences.

OBJECTIVES

To compare AD programs focusing on components of resources, activities, and services and to identify factors influencing program efficiency during the processes of program management, topic development, and service delivery among the selected Canadian and international AD programs.

METHODS

We adopted a process evaluation methodology with semistructured interviews and documents. We selected 4 well-established AD programs through an iterative discussion with the BC Ministry of Health: three provincial AD programs in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Ontario, and Saskatchewan, and an Australian program based in the State of South Australia. We invited one leader from each program to attend a 1-hour teleconferencing interview.

RESULTS

The 4 programs shared similarities of public government funding while differed in their operation models (centralized vs. decentralized), employment of detailers (part-time vs. full-time; hired by AD programs vs. hired by partnered multidisciplinary primary care teams) and staff who developed topics (detailers vs. nondetailers). The most common barriers were funding and reaching new participants, followed by team connection, detailer training resources, summarizing skills, and AD session scheduling. The most common facilitators were participant retention, participant recruitment through partnership, and easy access sessions.

CONCLUSION

AD programs can potentially guide a prescriber's choice of drug. A program's operation can be impacted by its access to resources and participants, activities, and service design.

A comparison of the clinical pharmacotherapy knowledge of medical and surgical residents and consultants

PURPOSE

Knowledge of clinical pharmacotherapy is essential for all who prescribe medication. The aims of this study were to investigate differences in the pharmacotherapy and polypharmacy knowledge of medical and surgical residents and consultants and whether this knowledge can be improved by following an online course.

METHODS

Design: A before-and-after-measurement.

SETTING

An online course available for Dutch residents and consultants working in hospitals.

STUDY POPULATION

Dutch residents and consultants from different disciplines who voluntarily followed an online course on geriatric care.

INTERVENTION

An online 6-week course on geriatric care, with 1 week dedicated to clinical pharmacotherapy and polypharmacy. Variables, such as medical vs surgical specialty, consultant vs resident, age, and sex, that could predict the level of knowledge. The effects of the online course were studied using repeated measures ANOVA. The study was approved by the National Ethics Review Board of Medical Education (NERB dossier number 996).

RESULTS

A total of 394 residents and 270 consultants, 220 from surgical and 444 from medical specialties, completed the online course in 2016 and 2017. Residents had higher test scores than consultants for pharmacotherapy (73% vs 70%, p < 0.02) and polypharmacy (75% vs 72%, p < 0.02). The learning effect did not differ. Medical residents/consultants had a better knowledge of pharmacotherapy (74% vs 68%, p < 0.001) and polypharmacy (77% vs 66%, p < 0.001) than surgical residents/consultants, but the learning effect was the same.

CONCLUSIONS

Residents and consultants had a similar learning curve for acquiring knowledge, but residents outperformed consultants on all measures. In addition, surgical and medical residents/consultants had similar learning curves, but medical residents/consultants had higher test scores on all measures.

The effect of structured medication review followed by face-to-face feedback to prescribers on adverse drug events recognition and prevention in older inpatients - a multicenter interrupted time series study

Background

The effectiveness of interventions to improve medication safety in older inpatients is unclear, given a paucity of properly designed intervention studies applying clinically relevant endpoints such as hospital-acquired preventable Adverse Drug Events (pADEs) and unrecognized Adverse Drug Events (uADEs). Therefore, we conducted a quality improvement study and used hospital-acquired pADEs and uADEs as main outcomes to assess the effect of an intervention aimed to improve medication safety in older inpatients.

Method

The study followed an interrupted time series design and consisted of three equally spaced sampling points during baseline and during intervention measurements. Each sampling point included between 80 to 90 patients. A total of 500 inpatients ≥65 years and admitted to internal medicine wards of three Dutch hospitals were included. An expert team retrospectively identified and assessed ADEs via a structured patient chart review. The findings from baseline measurement and meetings with the internal medicine and hospital pharmacy staff were used to design the intervention. The intervention consisted of a structured medication review by hospital pharmacists, followed by face-to-face feedback to prescribers, on average 3 days per week.

Results

The rate of hospital-acquired pADEs per 100 hospitalizations was reduced by 50.6% (difference 16.8, 95% confidence interval (CI): 9.0 to 24.6, P <  0.001), serious hospital-acquired pADEs by 62.7% (difference 12.8, 95% CI: 6.4 to 19.2, P <  0.001), and uADEs by 51.8% (difference 11.2, 95% CI: 4.4 to 18.0, P <  0.001). Additional analyses confirmed the robustness of the intervention effect, but residual bias cannot be excluded.

Conclusions

The intervention significantly decreased the overall and serious hospital-acquired pADE occurrence in older inpatients, and significantly improved overall ADE recognition by prescribers.

Trial registration

International Standard Randomized Controlled Trial Number Register, trial registration number: ISRCTN64974377, registration date (date assigned): 07/02/2011.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-022-03118-z.

Antibiotic Prescribing Errors in Patients Discharged From the Pediatric Emergency Department

OBJECTIVES

The pediatric emergency department (PED) is an especially high-risk setting for medication errors. Several factors contribute to this risk including the need to provide care to complex patients who are unknown to staff, the frequent use of verbal orders, and the necessity of weight-based dosing. This investigation sought to assess one potentially error-prone event, antibiotic prescriptions written for patients being discharged from the PED, and to characterize the occurrence of medication errors to identify opportunities for improvement.

METHODS

This was a retrospective study of pediatric patients seen at a large academic medical center PED. All prescriptions written for an antibiotic for patients 18 years or younger that were discharged from the PED from 2015 to 2018 were evaluated for errors in directions, indication, dose, quantity, and refills. Because antibiotic dosing can vary based on indications, only disease states with guideline-specific dosing recommendations were evaluated for dosing errors.

RESULTS

A total of 11,815 antibiotic prescriptions were analyzed for patients discharged from the PED, and 1986 (16.8%) errors were identified. Of all the prescriptions reviewed, 517 (4.4%) contained an incomplete prescription error. Discharge prescriptions written by off-service physicians were more likely to contain incomplete prescription errors (5.1%) when compared with emergency medicine physicians (3.9%; P = 0.022). A dosing error rate of 18.5% (1469 prescriptions) was identified for the 7930 disease state-specific prescriptions reviewed. Underdosing errors were significantly more common (51.6%) than overdosing errors (29.3%; P < 0.0001). Among the different agents, there was noted to be a significant difference in the antibiotics most commonly involved in dosing errors (P < 0.0001). Additionally, there was also a significant difference in the incidence of dosing errors between different disease states (P < 0.0001). No significant difference was found in the incidence of dosing errors across physician specialties (P = 0.872).

CONCLUSIONS

We identified 1986 (16.8%) total errors in this analysis of antibiotic prescriptions written on discharge from the PED. Among the disease states evaluated, dosing errors were identified in 18.5% of prescriptions with the most common error being underdosing. Literature evaluating pediatric prescription errors, and specifically antibiotic discharge prescriptions, is quite limited. Further investigation is necessary in this area, and strategies should be developed leveraging technology, enhancing education, and using pharmacy personnel to help reduce antibiotic prescribing errors for patients discharged from the PED.

Effect of Continuing Professional Development on Health Professionals' Performance and Patient Outcomes: A Scoping Review of Knowledge Syntheses

PURPOSE

Continuing professional development (CPD) programs, which aim to enhance health professionals' practice and improve patient outcomes, are offered to practitioners across the spectrum of health professions through both formal and informal learning activities. Various knowledge syntheses (or reviews) have attempted to summarize the CPD literature; however, these have primarily focused on continuing medical education or formal learning activities. Through this scoping review, the authors seek to answer the question, What is the current landscape of knowledge syntheses focused on the impact of CPD on health professionals' performance, defined as behavior change and/or patient outcomes?

METHOD

In September 2019, the authors searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Scopus, ERIC, and PsycINFO for knowledge syntheses published between 2008 and 2019 that focused on independently practicing health professionals and reported outcomes at Kirkpatrick's level 3 and/or 4.

RESULTS

Of the 7,157 citations retrieved from databases, 63 satisfied the inclusion criteria. Of these 63 syntheses, 38 (60%) included multicomponent approaches, and 29 (46%) incorporated eLearning interventions-either standalone or in combination with other interventions. While a majority of syntheses (n = 42 [67%]) reported outcomes affecting health care practitioners' behavior change and/or patient outcomes, most of the findings reported at Kirkpatrick level 4 were not statistically significant. Ten of the syntheses (16%) mentioned the cost of interventions though this was not their primary focus.

CONCLUSIONS

Across health professions, CPD is an umbrella term incorporating formal and informal approaches in a multicomponent approach. eLearning is increasing in popularity but remains an emerging technology. Several of the knowledge syntheses highlighted concerns regarding both the financial and human costs of CPD offerings, and such costs are being increasingly addressed in the CPD literature.

A pharmacotherapy self-assessment improves prescribing by prompting junior doctors to study further

AIMS

Junior doctors frequently prescribe incorrectly and this can cause serious harm to patients. Pharmacotherapy education in most medical schools falls short in preparing their students to prescribe safely in clinical practice. According to the theory of assessment-driven learning, a pharmacotherapy self-assessment for junior doctors may reduce potential harmful prescriptions in clinical practice, by revealing deficits in prescribing knowledge and skills.

METHODS

In this single centre, prospective cohort study, the potential harmful prescriptions of junior doctors in clinical practice were compared before and after a pharmacotherapy self-assessment with and without additional pharmacotherapy education.

RESULTS

Potential harmful prescriptions best known to cause harm to patients were studied in all the prescriptions written out by 199 junior doctors in the first 2 months of their employment in our hospital. The pharmacotherapy self-assessment reduced the total number of potential harmful prescriptions made by junior doctors relative to those made by junior doctors in the control group (1.3 vs. 3.2%, respectively; P < .001). Additional education did not reduce potential harmful prescriptions beyond the effect of the self-assessment alone (1.3 vs. 1.0%, P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacotherapy self-assessment leads to fewer potential harmful prescriptions made by junior doctors in clinical practice, thereby improving patient safety. More research is needed to investigate whether additional pharmacotherapy education strategies reduce potential harmful prescriptions further.

Prevalence and incidence rate of hospital admissions related to medication between 2008 and 2013 in The Netherlands

Purpose

In 2009 a Dutch guideline was published containing recommendations to reduce Hospital Admissions Related to Medications (HARMs). This study aims to examine time‐trends of HARMs and their potential preventability between 2008 and 2013 in The Netherlands.

Methods

A retrospective prevalence study was conducted using the Dutch PHARMO Database Network. A semi‐automated pre‐selection was used to make a crude identification of possible HARMs of which four samples were selected. These were independently assessed with respect to causality and potential preventability by a physician and pharmacist. The results were stratified by age into 18‐64 years and 65 years and older. For these groups the net prevalences and incidence rates of HARMs and potentially preventable HARMs were calculated for the years 2008, 2009, 2011 and 2013.

Results

Four samples of 467 (2008), 447 (2009), 446 (2011) and 408 (2013) admissions were assessed. The net prevalence of HARMs in the 18‐64 years group was approximately four times smaller compared to the older group with a mean prevalence of 2.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]:2.4%‐3.0%) and 10.2% (95%CI: 9.7%‐10.7%) respectively. The potential preventability was 25.1% (18.4%‐31.8%) and 48.3% (95%CI: 44.8%‐51.8%), respectively. The prevalence of HARMs in both groups did not change significantly between 2008 and 2013 with 2.4% (95%CI: 1.9%‐3.0%) and 10.0% (95%CI: 9.0%‐11.0%) in 2008 and 3.1% (2.7%‐3.5%) and 10.4% (95%CI: 9.4%‐11.4%) in 2013, respectively.

Conclusion

Despite efforts to reduce HARMs, the prevalence did not decrease over time. Additional measures are therefore necessary, especially in the elderly population.

Publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research: a multimethod study

Background

Bias in the publication and reporting of research findings (referred to as publication and related bias here) poses a major threat in evidence synthesis and evidence-based decision-making. Although this bias has been well documented in clinical research, little is known about its occurrence and magnitude in health services and delivery research.

Objectives

To obtain empirical evidence on publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research; to examine current practice in detecting/mitigating this bias in health services and delivery research systematic reviews; and to explore stakeholders’ perception and experiences concerning such bias.

Methods

The project included five distinct but interrelated work packages. Work package 1 was a systematic review of empirical and methodological studies. Work package 2 involved a survey (meta-epidemiological study) of randomly selected systematic reviews of health services and delivery research topics (n = 200) to evaluate current practice in the assessment of publication and outcome reporting bias during evidence synthesis. Work package 3 included four case studies to explore the applicability of statistical methods for detecting such bias in health services and delivery research. In work package 4 we followed up four cohorts of health services and delivery research studies (total n = 300) to ascertain their publication status, and examined whether publication status was associated with statistical significance or perceived ‘positivity’ of study findings. Work package 5 involved key informant interviews with diverse health services and delivery research stakeholders (n = 24), and a focus group discussion with patient and service user representatives (n = 8).

Results

We identified only four studies that set out to investigate publication and related bias in health services and delivery research in work package 1. Three of these studies focused on health informatics research and one concerned health economics. All four studies reported evidence of the existence of this bias, but had methodological weaknesses. We also identified three health services and delivery research systematic reviews in which findings were compared between published and grey/unpublished literature. These reviews found that the quality and volume of evidence and effect estimates sometimes differed significantly between published and unpublished literature. Work package 2 showed low prevalence of considering/assessing publication (43%) and outcome reporting (17%) bias in health services and delivery research systematic reviews. The prevalence was lower among reviews of associations than among reviews of interventions. The case studies in work package 3 highlighted limitations in current methods for detecting these biases due to heterogeneity and potential confounders. Follow-up of health services and delivery research cohorts in work package 4 showed positive association between publication status and having statistically significant or positive findings. Diverse views concerning publication and related bias and insights into how features of health services and delivery research might influence its occurrence were uncovered through the interviews with health services and delivery research stakeholders and focus group discussion conducted in work package 5.

Conclusions

This study provided prima facie evidence on publication and related bias in quantitative health services and delivery research. This bias does appear to exist, but its prevalence and impact may vary depending on study characteristics, such as study design, and motivation for conducting the evaluation. Emphasis on methodological novelty and focus beyond summative assessments may mitigate/lessen the risk of such bias in health services and delivery research. Methodological and epistemological diversity in health services and delivery research and changing landscape in research publication need to be considered when interpreting the evidence. Collection of further empirical evidence and exploration of optimal health services and delivery research practice are required.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42016052333 and CRD42016052366.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 8, No. 33. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Lessons learned: using adverse incident reports to investigate the characteristics and causes of prescribing errors

Introduction

Prescribing errors are a principal cause of preventable harm in healthcare. This study aims to establish a systematic approach to analysing prescribing-related adverse incident reports, in order to elucidate the characteristics and contributing factors of common prescribing errors and target multifaceted quality improvement initiatives.

Methods

All prescribing-related adverse incident reports submitted across one NHS board over 12 months were selected. Incidents involving commonly implicated drugs (involved in ≥10 incidents) underwent analysis to establish likely underlying causes using Reason’s Model of Accident Causation.

Results

330 prescribing-related adverse incident reports were identified. Commonly implicated drugs were insulin (10% of incidents), gentamicin (7%), co-amoxiclav (5%) and amoxicillin (5%). The most prevalent error types were prescribing amoxicillin when contraindicated due to allergy (5%); prescribing co-amoxiclav when contraindicated due to allergy (5%); prescribing the incorrect type of insulin (3%); and omitting to prescribe insulin (3%). Error-producing factors were identified in 86% of incidents involving commonly implicated drugs. 53% of incidents involved error-producing factors related to the working environment; 38% involved factors related to the healthcare team; and 37% involved factors related to the prescriber.

Discussion

This study establishes that systematic analysis of adverse incident reports can efficiently identify the characteristics and contributing factors of common prescribing errors, in a manner useful for targeting quality improvement. Furthermore, this study produced a number of salient findings. First, a narrow range of drugs were implicated in the majority of incidents. Second, a small number of error types were highly recurrent. Lastly, a range of contributing factors were evident, with those related to the working environment contributing to the majority of prescribing errors analysed.

Interventions to ensure medication safety in acute care: an umbrella review

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are one of the leading avoidable sources of harm to hospital patients. In hospitals, a range of interventions have been used to reduce the risk of errors at each of the points they may occur, such as prescription, dispensing and/or administration. Systematic reviews have been conducted on many of these interventions; however, it is difficult to compare the clinical utility of any of the separate interventions without the use of a rigorous umbrella review methodology.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this umbrella review was to synthesize the evidence from all systematic reviews investigating the effectiveness of medication safety interventions, in comparison to any or no comparator, for preventing medication errors, medication-related harms and death in acute care patients.

METHOD

The review considered quantitative systematic reviews with participants who were healthcare workers involved in prescribing, dispensing or administering medications. These healthcare workers were registered nurses, enrolled or licensed vocational nurses, midwives, pharmacists or medical doctors. Interventions of interest were those designed to prevent medication error in acute care settings. Eligible systematic reviews reported medication errors, medication-related harms and medication-related death as measured by error rates, numbers of adverse events and numbers of medication-related deaths. To qualify for inclusion, systematic reviews needed to provide a clearly articulated and comprehensive search strategy, and evidence of critical appraisal of the included studies using a standardized tool. Systematic reviews published in English since 2007 were included until present (March 2020). We searched a range of databases such MEDLINE, CINAHL, Web of Science, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library for potentially eligible reviews. Identified citations were screened by two reviewers working independently. Potentially eligible articles were retrieved and assessed against the inclusion criteria and those meeting the criteria were then critically appraised using the JBI SUMARI instrument for assessing the methodological quality of systematic reviews and research syntheses. A predetermined quality threshold was used to exclude studies based on their reported methods. Following critical appraisal, data were extracted from the included studies by two independent reviewers using the relevant instrument in JBI SUMARI. Extracted findings were synthesized narratively and presented in tables to illustrate the reported outcomes for each intervention. The strength of the evidence for each intervention was indicated using 'traffic light' colors: green for effective interventions, amber for interventions with no evidence of an effect and red for interventions less effective than the comparison.

RESULTS

A total of 23 systematic reviews were included in this umbrella review. Most reviews did not report the number of participants in their included studies. Interventions targeted pharmacists, medical doctors, medical students and nurses, or were nonspecific about the participants. The majority of included reviews examined single interventions. All reviews were published and in English. Four interventions, medication administration education, medication reconciliation or review, specialist pharmacists' roles and physical or design modifications, reported effectiveness in reducing errors; however, heterogeneity between the included studies in these reviews was high.

CONCLUSION

For some interventions, there are strong indications of effectiveness in reducing medication errors in the inpatient setting. Government initiatives, policy makers and practitioners interested in improving medication safety are encouraged to adopt those interventions.

The MOWER (middle of the week everyone gets a re-chart) pilot study: reducing in-hospital charting error with a multi-intervention

Background

Medication charting errors occur often and can be harmful for patients. Interventions to improve charting errors have demonstrated some success particularly if the intervention uses multiple approaches including an education component. The aim of this pilot study was to determine whether a multi-faceted intervention, including education of junior doctors and weekday re-charting could reduce in-hospital charting error.

Methods

Medication charts (n = 579) of all patients admitted to the medical ward of a medium sized regionally-based hospital in Australia over nine months (baseline and during intervention) were inspected for errors. The intervention ran for three months and involved implementation of a National Inpatient Medication Chart targeted error tool with eight targeted charting requirements which was used for visual reminders in the ward and training of junior doctors. In addition, mid-weekly re-charting (MOWER) was performed by a senior and junior doctor team.

Results

The mean number of charting requirement errors significantly reduced during the intervention by 26% from 4.6 ± 1.3 to 3.4 ± 1.7 per chart (p < 0.001). Re-chart errors reduced on average by 50% (4.4 ± 1.4 to 2.2 ± 1.7 per chart, p < 0.001) and primary (initial) charts by 20% (4.6 ± 1.3 to 3.7 ± 1.5 per chart, p < 0.001) during the intervention. Failing to provide indication information for a drug, prescriber name, and failing to use generic rather than brand names were the categories with the most errors at baseline and also showed the largest error reductions during the intervention.

Conclusions

A multi-intervention including education of junior doctors, visual reminders and midweek re-charting are effective in reducing the rate of charting errors. We advise that a larger study is now conducted using the same multi-intervention strategy in different ward settings to evaluate feasibility and sustainability of this intervention.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-4230-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Towards a "prescribing license" for medical students: development and quality evaluation of an assessment for safe prescribing

PURPOSE

This report describes the development and validation process of an assessment with national consensus in appropriate and safe pharmacotherapy.

METHODS

A question-database on safe prescription based on literature of pharmacotherapy-related harm was developed by an expert group from Dutch medical faculties. Final-year medical students concluded a 2-year education program on appropriate and safe prescription by one of nine assessment variants of 40 multiple-choice questions each. An expert panel of professionals (n = 10) answered all database questions and rated questions on relevance. Questions were selected for revision based on lack of relevance or poor test and item characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 576 final-year medical students of the Radboud University was assessed. There was no significant difference in performance between students and content expert group (p = 0.7), probably due to learning behavior. Out of 165 questions, 59 were selected for revision.

CONCLUSION

Joint national effort from a team of experts in prescription and pharmacotherapy is an appropriate way to achieve a valid and reliable last-year student drug prescription assessment.

Usability and sensitivity of the risk of bias assessment tool for randomized controlled trials of pharmacist interventions

Background The Cochrane collaboration risk of bias assessment (RoB) tool is used in several fields to evaluate the methodological quality of studies. Its strengths and challenges are discussed. Objective To assess the sensitivity of the RoB tool in studies of pharmacist interventions. Setting DEPICT database was used to pool randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of complex interventions. Method A Guide for RoB Judgment in Pharmacy Services was created to help in the interpretation and judgment of bias criteria. The evaluation of bias (low, unclear, high risk) was performed by RCT. Sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the influence of different interpretations of eight elements of judgment in the RoB tool. Paired analysis and estimations of the effect size (95% confidence interval) of the criteria modifications compared to the original analyses were calculated. Main outcome measure Changes in the interpretations of judgment in the RoB tool. Results Overall, 8.3, 45.4, and 46.3% of the studies were determined to have low, unclear, and high risk of bias, respectively. High risk of bias was caused by attrition and detection domains. The number of studies classified with high risk of bias significantly increased for five of the eight interpretations, while unclear risk of bias increased for three interpretations (with a negligible effect size in all of them). Lack of blinding, loss of participants, and the use of subjective and self-reported outcomes were the main elements resulting in high risk of bias. Conclusion The RoB tool is useful for evaluating RCTs of pharmacist interventions if adapted criteria for judgment are used. Ignoring these adjustments produces a floor-effect with studies classified with high risk of bias.

Educational intervention can improve appropriateness of acid suppression therapy in hospitalized geriatric patients

Background: Inappropriate use of acid suppression (AST) therapy may lead to unnecessary harms, especially in the geriatric population. Despite this, AST remains one of the most commonly prescribed medications in the hospital. Therefore, we aimed to assess its prevalence and create educational intervention to improve the appropriateness of inpatient acid suppression therapy.

Methods: Using a time-series design, we established a historical control by performing a retrospective chart. Accepted indications for AST were based on those endorsed by the USA Food and Drug Administration and literature review. Inclusion criteria were: (1) age ≥ 65; (2) acid suppression therapy-initiated in the hospital; and (3) patients admitted to the medicine teaching services. We then created an educational intervention, which consisted of lectures and distribution of information pocket cards to residents. Data was collected for two months after the intervention. We used a two-tail fisher exact test and student’s t-test to analyze our results.

Results: 65% of geriatric patients were inappropriately placed on acid suppression therapy, for which 13% were discharged without further indications. After the educational intervention, the inappropriate use of acid suppression therapy decreased to 45% (P < 0.05).

Conclusion: There is a significant overuse of AST in hospitalized geriatric patients. Educational interventions are one potential method that may help improve the appropriateness of acid suppression therapy for elderly inpatients.

A multifaceted intervention to reduce guideline non-adherence among prescribing physicians in Dutch hospitals

Background Despite the potential of clinical practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes, adherence to guidelines by prescribers is inconsistent. Objective The aim of the study was to determine whether an approach of introducing an educational programme for prescribers in the hospital combined with audit and feedback by the hospital pharmacist reduces non-adherence of prescribing physicians to key pharmacotherapeutic guidelines. Setting This prospective intervention study with a before–after design evaluated patients at surgical, urological and orthopaedic wards. Method An educational program covering pain management, antithrombotics, fluid and electrolyte management, prescribing in case of renal insufficiency, application of radiographic contrast agents and surgical antibiotic prophylaxis was presented to prescribers on the participating wards. Hospital pharmacists performed medication safety consultations, combining medication review of patients who are at risk for drug related problems with visits to ward physicians. Main outcome measure The outcome measure was the proportion of the admissions of patients in which the physician did not adhere to one or more of the included guidelines. Difference was expressed in odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed. Results 1435 Admissions of 1378 patients during the usual care period and 1195 admissions of 1090 patients during the intervention period were included. Non-adherence was observed significantly less often during the intervention period [21.8% (193/886)] as compared to the usual care period [30.5% (332/1089)]. The adjusted OR was 0.61 (95% CI 0.49–0.76). Conclusion This study shows that education and support of the prescribing physician can reduce guideline non-adherence at surgical wards.

The effect of prescriber education on medication-related patient harm in the hospital: a systematic review

AIMS

Educating prescribers is a strategy to reduce prescription errors in hospitals. The present systematic review gives an overview of original research papers on the education of prescribers and reporting outcomes on (potential) patient harm.

METHODS

A search of the databases Embase and Medline, using the Ovid interface, was performed. Research on the effect of physician education in order to prevent medication-related problems in inpatients, and on reporting original data and outcomes on prescribing errors and/or (potential) patient harm, was included. The assessment of methodological quality and risk of bias was performed using the Methodological Index for Non-Randomized studies (MINORS) checklist and the suggested risk of bias criteria for Effective Practice and Organization of Care (EPOC) reviews.

RESULTS

Eight studies investigated an intervention on education alone, and in seven studies education was the main part of a multifaceted intervention. All studies were small and had short follow-up periods. The educational programmes varied and were given to physicians of different specialties and levels of experience. Most studies reported intermediate process parameters as the outcome. The risk of performance and reporting bias were high.

CONCLUSION

All included studies suffered from poor methodology. The majority, especially studies in which education was part of a multifaceted intervention, reported effectiveness on intermediate outcome markers as prescription errors and potential adverse drug events. However, we found no firm evidence that educating prescribers in the hospital leads to a decrease in patient harm. Further work is needed to develop educational programmes, accompanied by more high-quality research with outcomes on the improvement of patient care.