Calculating the cost of medication errors: A systematic review of approaches and cost variables

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors are an unnecessary cost to a healthcare system and patients of a country. This review aimed to systematically identify published cost variables used to calculate the cost of medication errors and to explore any updates on findings already known on calculating the cost of medication errors during the past 10 years.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus, Emerald and JSTOR were searched, using keywords "medication error" AND "cost" and predetermined inclusion criteria. Duplicate articles were removed. Quality check was done using 10 criteria. Cost variables used in calculating the cost of medication errors were extracted from each article.

RESULTS

Among 3088 articles, 33 articles were selected for review. Most studies were conducted in Western countries. Cost variables used (types and number) by different studies varied widely. Most studies (N=29) had used direct costs only. A few studies (N=4) had used both direct and indirect costs for the purpose. Perspectives considered when calculating cost of medication errors also varied widely. A total of 35 variables used to calculate medication error costs were extracted from selected articles.

CONCLUSION

Variables used to calculate the cost of medication errors were not uniform across studies. Almost a decade after systematic reviews previously reporting on this area, a validated methodology to calculate the cost of medication errors has still not been reported to date and highlights the still pending necessity of a standard method to be established.

Estimated Costs of Drug-Related Problems Prevented by Pharmacist Prescription Reviews Among Hospitalized Internal Medicine Patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Data are lacking on the estimated costs of pharmacist prescription reviews (PPRs) for hospitalized internal medicine patients. This study investigates the estimated costs of drug-related problems (DRPs) prevented by PPRs among hospitalized internal medicine patients.

METHODS

We reviewed all medication orders for patients at an academic teaching hospital in China for 2 years. DRPs were categorized using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification. The severity of the potential harm of DRPs was assessed by the Harm Associated with Medication Error Classification (HAMEC) tool. The estimated cost of PPRs was calculated.

RESULTS

A total of 162426 medication orders for 4314 patients were reviewed, and 1338 DRPs were identified by pharmacists who spent 2230 hours performing PPRs. Among the 1080 DRPs that were prospectively intervened upon, 703 were resolved. The HAMEC tool showed that 47.1% of DRPs were assessed as level 2, 30.4% as level 3, 20.6% as level 1, and 0.6% carried a life-threatening risk. Pharmacist interventions contributed to the prevention of DRP errors and a reduction of $339 139.44. This resulted in a mean cost saving of $482.42 per patient at an input cost of $21 495.06 over the 2 years. The benefit-cost ratio was 15.8.

CONCLUSION

PPRs are beneficial for detecting potential DRPs and creating potential cost savings among hospitalized internal medicine patients.

Clinical and economic impact of clinical oncology pharmacy in cancer patients receiving injectable anticancer treatments: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Clinical pharmacy can reduce drug-related iatrogenesis by improving the management of adverse effects of drugs, limiting drug-drug interactions, and improving patient adherence. Given the vulnerability of cancer patients and the toxicity of injectable anticancer drugs, clinical pharmacy service (CPS) could provide a significant clinical benefit in cancer care. This review aims to synthesize existing evidence on clinical pharmacy's impact on patients treated with intravenous anticancer drugs.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was performed in the PubMed/Medline database from January 2000 to December 2021, associating the keywords: clinical pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, pharmacist, oncology, and chemotherapy. To be eligible for inclusion, studies have to report clinical pharmaceutical services for patients treated with intravenous chemotherapy with a clinical and/or economic impact.

RESULTS

Forty-one studies met the selection criteria. Various CPS were reported: medication reconciliation, medication review, and pharmaceutical interview with patient. There was a lack of randomized study (n = 3; 7.3%). In one randomized controlled trial, pharmaceutical intervention significantly improved quality of life of patients receiving pharmaceutical care during injectable anticancer drugs courses. Economical results appear to show positive impact of clinical pharmacy with cost savings reported from 3112.87$ to 249 844€. Although most studies were non-comparative, they highlighted that clinical pharmacy tend to limit chemotherapy side effects and drug-related problems, improve quality of life and satisfaction of patients and healthcare professional, and a positive economic impact.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pharmacy can reduce adverse drug events in cancer patients. More robust and economic evaluations are still required to support its development in everyday practice.

Clinical and Economic Impact of Pharmacists' Intervention on Care of Pediatric Hematology and Oncology Patients

INTRODUCTION

Children with cancer may be one of the most vulnerable groups to drug-related adverse events because they possess characteristics of patients with cancer as well as pediatric patients. To evaluate the clinical and economic impact of pharmacists' intervention on the care of pediatric hematology and oncology patients in the inpatient and outpatient settings of a children's hospital.

METHODS

The pharmacist-intervention records from 2017 were retrospectively reviewed. Intervention rate, type of drug-related problems, acceptance rate, and frequently involved drugs in pharmacist interventions were analyzed. One physician and one pharmacist evaluated the clinical significance of each intervention. A cost-benefit analysis was conducted from hospital and patient perspective. The benefit from cost savings by reducing the number of prescribed drugs that are disposed was estimated as the benefit from hospital perspective. The benefit from cost avoidance based on the potential to avoid an adverse drug event (ADE) was estimated as the benefit from patient perspective. The cost of reviewing prescriptions was estimated based on the pharmacists' salary and the time involved.

RESULTS

In 2017, 2361 interventions were performed in 381 pediatric patients with cancer. The acceptance rate was 97.2%. More than half of the interventions were regarded as clinically "significant" (58.8%) and "very significant" (14.6%). The cost-benefit of US$28,705 was determined from hospital perspective, with a cost-benefit ratio of 1.45:1. The cost-benefit of US$35,611 was calculated from patient perspective, with a cost-benefit ratio of 1.55:1.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacists' intervention in the care of hematology and oncology pediatric patients was effective in preventing clinically significant ADEs and had a positive economic impact on the health-care budget from both hospital and patient perspective.

Large Predominance of Off-Label Prescriptions of C1-Inhibitor Concentrates and Icatibant in a Real-Life Setting: A Retrospective Clinical Study

C1-inhibitor (C1INH) concentrates and the selective bradykinin B2 receptor antagonist icatibant are approved only for treating hereditary angioedema with C1INH deficiency. Yet, they are regularly prescribed off label in other types of bradykinin-mediated angioedema including angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor (ACEi)-related and undetermined angioedema. We conducted a retrospective chart review of inpatient prescriptions of C1INH concentrates and icatibant between 2016 and 2020 in the University Hospital of Angers. The first outcome was the proportion of prescriptions with explicit indication. Then, we determined the compliance of prescriptions with European Medicines Agency approvals and the French bradykinin-mediated angioedema reference center guidelines. Finally, we estimated the economic impact of inappropriate prescribing. The therapeutic indication was explicit in 90.4% of prescriptions (n = 66/73). Only 17.8% of prescriptions were for hereditary angioedema with C1INH deficiency, while 31.5% were for ACEi-related and 28.7% for undetermined angioedema. However, most off-label prescriptions were consistent with the French bradykinin-mediated angioedema reference center guidelines (73.3%). We estimated that 13% of drug expenditures were potentially excessive. The predominance of off-label prescriptions may be explained by the infrequency of hereditary angioedema and the absence of approved alternatives in other types of bradykinin-mediated angioedema. Most attacks were related to ACEis. Epinephrine was rarely prescribed as first-line therapy in attacks of unknown origin. Given the high prices of these drugs, we advocate the development of a readily available management algorithm of angioedema to reduce inappropriate prescriptions in our center. In addition, we think that the drug prescription circuit should be redesigned to ensure the traceability of prescribed vials in the dispensing areas.

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.

Error Detection and Cost Savings With an Image-Based Workflow Management System Connected to a Computerized Prescription Order Entry Program for Antineoplastic Compounding

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to analyze both the prevalence of errors with the implementation of an image-based workflow management system during the antineoplastic compounding process, and the estimated costs associated with the negative clinical outcome if the errors had not been intercepted.

METHODS

Three months after the implementation of Phocus Rx system at a hospital pharmacy department, the identification, classification (type, preparation stage, and cause), and potential severity degree (from negligible to catastrophic) of the errors intercepted were determined. The probability of an error causing an adverse event if it had reached the patient (from nil [0] to high [0.6]) and its consequences was estimated by a team of clinical pharmacists and physicians. Cost-effectiveness analysis from the hospital's perspective was performed.

RESULTS

Overall, 9872 antineoplastic medications were prepared using Phocus Rx. The total compounding error rate was 0.8% (n = 78, 56 [69.2%] were related to incorrect dose, 20 [28.2%] to incorrect drug preparation or conditioning technique, and 2 [2.6%] were wrong drugs). Approximately 70% of the detected errors were classified as undetectable via the previous verification practice, with 11.55% judged to be potentially severe (n = 9) and 51.3% moderate (n = 29). Likelihood of occurrence of an adverse event was medium (0.4) to high (0.6) for 37.2% of the errors. Estimated cost ratio and return on investment were €4.21 and 321%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of Phocus Rx prevented antineoplastic preparation errors that would have reached the patient otherwise. In addition, acquisition of this technology was estimated to be cost-effective.

Effects of Pharmacist-Led Clinical Pathway/Order Sets on Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review

Background: Pharmacist-led clinical pathways/order sets (PLCOs) were first applied for designated diseases and surgical operations, such as cancer. They were not used in pharmacotherapy until recently. After screening a large number of publications, we found that PLCOs were rarely accessible.

Objective: To evaluate the effects and the changes of relevant medical outcomes of PLCOs.

Methods: Articles from PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang database, and China Biology Medicine disc (CBM) were systematically retrieved. Clinical research comparing cancer patients’ clinical effects with or without clinical pathway/order sets was performed. Two reviewers performed quality assessment, and the data were abstracted independently. A narrative synthesis of the extracted data was performed due to heterogeneity.

Results: Nine studies were identified, including six uncontrolled before–after studies and three case-series studies. The scopes of PLCOs of included research can be divided into two types, one focusing on chemotherapy agents and the other on the managements of chemotherapy-induced complications. The PLCOs shortened hospital length of stay, decreased initial antibiotic time intervals in patients with febrile neutropenia, reduced medication error incidence, and increased physicians’ adherence rate to clinical pathway/order sets. Moreover, three articles included economic effects showing positive savings on medication costs through PLCOs.

Conclusion: PLCOs can have beneficial effects on medication effectiveness, safety, and economic outcomes. Nevertheless, clinical pathway/order sets need to be further optimized and expanded to other clinical areas.

Clinical, economic and organizational impact of pharmacist interventions on injectable antineoplastic prescriptions: a prospective observational study

Background

Pharmacists play a key role in ensuring the safe use of injectable antineoplastics, which are considered as high-alert medications. Pharmaceutical analysis of injectable antineoplastic prescriptions aims to detect and prevent drug related problems by proposing pharmacist interventions (PI). The impact of this activity for patients, healthcare facilities and other health professionals is not completely known. This study aimed at describing the clinical, economic, and organizational impacts of PIs performed by pharmacists in a chemotherapy preparation unit.

Methods

A prospective 10-week study was conducted on PIs involving injectable antineoplastic prescriptions. Each PI was assessed by one of the four multidisciplinary expert committees using a multidimensional tool with three independent dimensions: clinical, economic and organizational. An ancillary quantitative evaluation of drug cost savings was conducted.

Results

Overall, 185 patients were included (mean age: 63.5 ± 13.7 years; 54.1% were male) and 237 PIs concerning 10.1% prescriptions were recorded. Twenty one PIs (8.9%) had major clinical impact (ie: prevented hospitalization or permanent disability), 49 PIs (20.7%) had moderate clinical impact (ie: prevented harm that would have required further monitoring/treatment), 62 PIs (26.2%) had minor clinical impact, 95 PIs (40.0%) had no clinical impact, and 9 PIs (3.8%) had a negative clinical impact. For one PI (0.4%) the clinical impact was not determined due to insufficient information. Regarding organizational impact, 67.5% PIs had a positive impact on patient management from the healthcare providers’ perspective. A positive economic impact was observed for 105 PIs (44.3%), leading to a saving in direct drug costs of 15,096 €; 38 PIs (16.0%) had a negative economic impact, increasing the direct drug cost by 11,878 €. Overall cost saving was 3218€.

Conclusions

PIs are associated with positive clinical, economic and organizational impacts. This study confirms the benefit of pharmacist analysis of injectable antineoplastic prescriptions for patient safety with an overall benefit to the healthcare system.

Effects of pharmacist interventions on reducing prescribing errors of investigational drugs in oncology clinical trials

Objectives

This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of pharmacist intervention in reducing and preventing prescribing errors of investigational drugs for cancer patients.

Materials and methods

A retrospective study was conducted during two periods: a baseline period from December 2015 to June 2016 and an intervention period from July 2016 to February 2017. The investigational drug service (IDS) pharmacists performed active interventions during the intervention period.

Results

Among 12,387 investigational drug orders, 395 (6.1%) prescribing errors were detected in 6477 orders at the baseline period, and 278 errors (4.7%) were detected in 5,910 orders at the intervention period. To identify factors that affect prescribing errors, three models were constructed for the multivariate analysis. Among factors affecting prescribing errors, sponsor initiated trial (SIT) was the strongest factor (AOR: 4.16, 95% CI: 3.31–5.23). Pharmacist intervention reduced prescribing errors by at least 25% in all constructed models after adjusting for confounding variables. Prescribing errors were 1.3 times higher when dealing with intravenous medications than when dealing with oral medications. There were 60% fewer prescribing errors in the blinded study than in the open study. SIT and multi-center/multi-nation studies had 4.2 and 2.4 times more frequent prescribing errors than in investigator-initiated trials (IIT) and single-center/single-nation studies, respectively. Fewer errors occurred in phase 2 and trials covering both phase 1 and phase 2 (phase 1/2) than in phase 3 trials.

Conclusions

The IDS pharmacist intervention in cancer clinical trials was associated with significant reductions in prescribing errors and may lead to increased medication safety.

Computerized pediatric oncology prescriptions review by pharmacist: A descriptive analysis and associated risk factors

BACKGROUND

Systematic prescription analyses by clinical pharmacists result in pharmacist interventions (PIs) to reduce prescription errors and improve medication safety. PIs are particularly critical in oncology, because antineoplastic drugs are highly toxic with low therapeutic indexes especially in a pediatric population. The aim of this study is to describe PIs in a pediatric oncology department and to identify potential risk factors associated with prescription errors.

PROCEDURE

We conducted a 20-month observational study in a pediatric oncology department concerning electronic prescription of injectable chemotherapies was conducted. PIs were analyzed for drug-related problems (DRPs), type of intervention, population characteristics, involved drugs, and the potential risk factors.

RESULTS

Clinical pharmacists made 90 PIs for 10,214 antineoplastic prescriptions for a rate of 88 PIs per 10,000 prescriptions. The majority of DRPs were dosage errors (61.8%), imputable to measurements (weight and/or height) in 47.4% or unreported dose reduction. The most common patient ages were in the range 1-10 years and the most common time for medical double checks was 2-9 pm. There were statistically more prescription errors in standardized protocols (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Not surprisingly, PIs were predominantly to correct dose errors, half of which related to height and weight measurements that were not updated. No significant risk factors for errors were identified for errors except in the standardized status of prescription, which appears to be linked in part to our software that did not automatically reflect dose reduction from one course to the next. Medical double-checking followed by a clinical pharmacist's double check were effective in order to prevent prescription errors.

Personalization and Patient Involvement in Decision Support Systems: Current Trends

OBJECTIVES

This survey aims at highlighting the latest trends (2012-2014) on the development, use, and evaluation of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) based decision support systems (DSSs) in medicine, with a particular focus on patient-centered and personalized care.

METHODS

We considered papers published on scientific journals, by querying PubMed and Web of ScienceTM. Included studies focused on the implementation or evaluation of ICT-based tools used in clinical practice. A separate search was performed on computerized physician order entry systems (CPOEs), since they are increasingly embedding patient-tailored decision support.

RESULTS

We found 73 papers on DSSs (53 on specific ICT tools) and 72 papers on CPOEs. Although decision support through the delivery of recommendations is frequent (28/53 papers), our review highlighted also DSSs only based on efficient information presentation (25/53). Patient participation in making decisions is still limited (9/53), and mostly focused on risk communication. The most represented medical area is cancer (12%). Policy makers are beginning to be included among stakeholders (6/73), but integration with hospital information systems is still low. Concerning knowledge representation/management issues, we identified a trend towards building inference engines on top of standard data models. Most of the tools (57%) underwent a formal assessment study, even if half of them aimed at evaluating usability and not effectiveness.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, we have noticed interesting evolutions of medical DSSs to improve communication with the patient, consider the economic and organizational impact, and use standard models for knowledge representation. However, systems focusing on patient-centered care still do not seem to be available at large.

A systematic review of approaches for calculating the cost of medication errors

Introduction

Although medication errors may cause significant morbidity and mortality, the true cost of avoidable harm from such errors is unclear. While studies describe different methods for calculating a financial cost from an error, there remains variability in the way calculations are conducted depending on the clinical context. This review aimed to investigate the range of approaches for calculating medication error costs across healthcare settings.

Methods

A systematic review was carried out with a duplicate data extraction approach and mixed methods data synthesis. Medline, Embase and Web of Science were searched for studies published between 1993 and 2015. Studies that explicitly described a method for calculating medication error cost were included. The variables used for the calculations and a description of the approach for calculating errors were reported.

Results

21 studies were included in the final review. There was wide variation in the way calculations were undertaken, with some calculations using a single variable only and others using several variables in a multistep approach. Few calculations included indirect costs, such as loss of earnings for the patient, and only one calculation considered opportunity cost. The majority of studies presented direct medication error costs whereas others approximated error costs from the savings made following an intervention.

Conclusions

There are a wide range of methods used for calculating the cost of medication errors. The diversity arises from the number of variables used in calculations, the perspective from which the calculation is conducted from, and the degree of economic rigour applied by researchers.

[Study impacto: Descriptive analyzis of pharmacist's clinical practice in onco-hematology]

Pharmaceutical analyses of chemotherapy prescriptions by hospital pharmacists are activities codified by regulation and rules (bon usage). The involvement of the pharmacists in clinical pharmacy activities in the oncology setting is not clearly identified, justifying the development of a mapping of these activities from a questionnaire addressed to the professionals. One hundred and seven centers have participated to this study at the national level (overall participation rate of 32.4%). More than 95% of them used a computerized ordering system and three quarter of them submit the introduction of new compounds to an analysis by the drug therapeutic committee. Prescription analysis allowed detecting around 2% of errors from the current prescription. Clinical pharmacist participates to tumor boards of onco-hematology (RCP) at a level of 46% for senior pharmacist and 42% for junior pharmacist. This involvement in the RCP allowed anticipating protocol's modification and temporary used authorization. Ninety-two percent of the senior pharmacists estimate that they highlight the risk of no reimbursement for prescription out of the guideline during RCP, resulting to a modification of the prescription for 40% of them. This level of intervention is lower with respectively 64% and 10% for the juniors. This study underlines the expert value of the clinical pharmacist dedicated to oncology setting in pre and post analysis prescriptions. It could be targeted by a prospective analysis of both clinical and pharmacoeconomics impact of these interventions.

Expected net benefit of clinical pharmacy in intensive care medicine: a randomized interventional comparative trial with matched before-and-after groups

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated clinical pharmacy costs against drug costs.

METHOD

We conducted a randomized interventional comparative trial at the surgical intensive care unit (ICU) of Ghent University Hospital, Belgium (period B: group B1 with pharmacist consultation; control group B0). We obtained before (period A) and after (period C) control groups using 1:1 propensity score matching with B1 and B0. Mean daily ICU drug costs with standard error of the mean (SEM) were compared between B1 and B0 (primary analysis) and between matched pairs (AB1, AB0, CB1 and CB0; secondary analysis). For B, we performed a 1000 bootstrapping (by resampling B1 and B0), calculated the benefit-cost ratio using pharmacy time (gross salary) as cost (euros) and drug cost savings as benefit. We performed sensitivity analysis with and without outlier drug costs (i.e. twice the standard deviation).

PERSPECTIVE

Belgian health care payer.

RESULTS

In period B, 135 patients were randomized: B0, n = 60; B1, n = 75. Pharmacists provided recommendations in 148/706 (21.0%) therapies with 83.1% acceptance. Mean drug cost difference between B0 (430.6 euros, SEM 406.0) and B1 (221.2 euros, SEM 58.7) (P = 0.870) became significant after excluding outlier drug costs (B0, 184.4 euros, SEM 42.5; B1, 90.5 euros, SEM 17.7; P < 0.001). Recommendations were cost-beneficial (break-even drug costs or savings) in 53.8% of patients with a benefit-cost ratio of 25:1 (confidence interval -5:1 to 94:1). In sensitivity analysis excluding outlier drug costs, B0 costs were significantly higher than both A and C, indicating high baseline expenses in B0.

CONCLUSIONS

The randomized interventional comparative trial in a small ICU patient group suggested the potential cost-benefit of clinical pharmacy on daily ICU drug costs. However, after matching, this benefit was attenuated. A final conclusion demands a larger randomized trial adopting a similar design with matched controls. Future research should include clinical impact of recommendations.