An integrative review of drug errors in critical care

Ratios d’incidents et d’accidents totaux et médicamenteux par 1000 jours-présence en établissement de santé au Québec: une étude exploratoire

Background

Since 2022, it has been mandatory in Québec to report all incidents and accidents (I&As) occurring in health-care facilities. Since 2011, a summary report of these I&As has been published each year. However, it is difficult to compare health facilities given that no denominator is specified and ratios are not calculated.

Objective

The primary objective was to calculate the ratios of total I&As and medication-related I&As per 1000 inpatient-days per type of facility for all health-care facilities in Québec.

Methods

This retrospective descriptive study was based on data from the period of April 1, 2016, to March 31, 2021. Data were extracted from the National Register of Incidents and Accidents Occurring during the Provision of Health Care and Social Services in Québec (Registre national des incidents et accidents survenus lors de la prestation des soins et services de santé au Québec) and financial reports. The ratios of total I&As/1000 inpatient-days and medication-related I&As/1000 inpatient-days, expressed as the mean ± standard deviation and median [minimum; maximum], were calculated.

Results

A total of 85 health-care facilities had usable data, specifically 33 acute-care facilities, 45 long-term care facilities, and 7 rehabilitation facilities. The mean ratio for total I&As/1000 inpatient-days varied from 33 ± 19 to 38 ± 22 in acute-care facilities, from 14 ± 5 to 16 ± 7 in long-term care facilities, and from 99 ± 39 to 147 ± 55 in rehabilitation facilities. The mean ratio for medication-related I&As/1000 inpatient-days varied from 11 ± 7 to 12 ± 7 in acute care facilities, from 3 ± 2 to 4 ± 3 in long-term care facilities, and from 24 ± 10 to 40 ± 21 in rehabilitation facilities.

Conclusions

This exploratory study demonstrated the feasibility of calculating I&A ratios from the National Register of Incidents and Accidents Occurring during the Provision of Health Care and Social Services in Québec. These ratios facilitate discussion of the reporting culture of I&As within the health-care system. It is hoped that these ratios will be added to future annual reports from the Québec I&A register.

Comparison of Drug-Related Problems in COVID-19 and Non-COVID-19 Patients Provided by a German Telepharmacy Service for Rural Intensive Care Units

Telepharmacy is used to bridge the persisting shortage of specialist ward-based pharmacists, particularly in intensive care units (ICU). During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), pharmacotherapy was rapidly developed, which resulted in multiple changes of guidelines. This potentially led to a differing risk for drug-related problems (DRPs) in ICUs. In this study, DRPs were detected in telepharmacy consultations of a German state-wide telemedicine network for adult patients in rural ICUs. The analysis included ICUs of ten general care hospitals with a total of 514 patients and 1056 consultations. The aim of this retrospective, observational cohort study was to compare and analyze the DRPs resulting from ICU patients with or without COVID-19. Furthermore, known risk groups for severe COVID-19 progression (organ insufficiency [kidney, liver], obesity, sex, and/or older age) were investigated with their non-COVID-19 counterparts. As a result, in both groups patients with acute renal insufficiency and without renal replacement therapy showed a significantly higher risk of being affected by one or more DRPs compared to patients with normal renal function. In COVID-19 patients, the initial recommendation of therapeutic anticoagulation (ATC-code B01AB 'Heparin group') resulted in significantly more DRPs compared to non-COVID-19 patients. Therefore, COVID-19 patients with therapeutic anticoagulation and all ICU patients with renal insufficiency should be prioritized for telepharmacy consultations.

Simulation-based training program on patient safety management: A quasi-experimental study among new intensive care unit nurses

BACKGROUND

Patient safety is an essential responsibility of nurses. However, newly graduated nurses experience patient safety incidents due to a lack of patient safety competency. In particular, intensive care unit nurses provide care to critical patients, making it difficult for new nurses to maintain patient safety. Therefore, it is necessary to improve the patient safety competency of newly graduated nurses working in the intensive care unit.

OBJECTIVES

To analyze the effects of a simulation-based training program on patient safety management on the patient safety competency, patient safety management activity, communication self-efficacy, and teamwork of newly graduated nurses working in an intensive care unit.

DESIGN

A quasi-experimental study.

SETTINGS

The study was conducted at a university in Korea.

PARTICIPANTS

A total of 44 newly graduated nurses working in the intensive care unit of a university hospital.

METHODS

A simulation-based training program on patient safety management was applied to the experimental group (n = 22), while only the usual hospital training program was used for the control group (n = 22). A structured questionnaire survey comprising Patient Safety Competency Self-Evaluation, Patient Safety Management Activities, the Korean version of the self-efficacy questionnaire, and K-self assessment of teamwork was conducted at baseline test (T1), post test (T2), and follow-up test (T3). Data were analyzed using a repeated measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

The experimental group showed significantly higher patient safety competency, patient safety knowledge, and patient safety skills, along with higher communication self-efficacy scores than the control group (p < .05) after the intervention and at four weeks after the intervention.

CONCLUSIONS

The simulation-based training program on patient safety management effectively improved the patient safety competency, patient safety knowledge, and patient safety skills as well as communication self-efficacy of newly graduated nurses working in an intensive care unit.

Should Pharmacists Lead Medication Reconciliation in Critical Care? A One-Stem Interventional Study in an Egyptian Intensive Care Unit

OBJECTIVES

The main objective was to compare physician-obtained medication histories to the practice of medication reconciliation undertaken by a pharmacist in the intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

A one-stem interventional study involving 500 adults 18 years and older admitted to the ICU (50 beds) of an Egyptian Joint Commission International-accredited reference hospital was conducted. The primary outcome measure was the proportion of ICU patients with missing medications in the cohorts of physician versus pharmacist-led medication reconciliation. The secondary outcome measure was the percentage of patients who had at least one clinical condition or adverse event (AE) that was left untreated during hospitalization of the 2 arms of patients after reconciliation.

RESULTS

A total of 500 patients received reconciliation. Medication discrepancies in the cohort of physician-led reconciliation were greater than that of the pharmacist (26.1% versus 2.6%, P = 0.001). The most common discrepancy was indication with no medication, which was found to be greater in the physician-led cohort of patients than that of the pharmacist cohort (25.2% versus 2.6%, P = 0.001). Untreated AEs in the former cohort were present in 9.1% of cases versus 1.5% in the pharmacist-led reconciliation cohort ( P = 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The present study revealed that pharmacist-led medication reconciliation in ICU has dramatically decreased medication discrepancies and AEs in adults with acute ICU admissions.

A comparative study of patient safety in the intensive care units

Aim

This study aimed to assess patient‐safety principles in ICUs.

Design

This is a descriptive‐comparative study.

Methods

The research environment includes ICUs of hospitals affiliated to the two universities of medical sciences in Tehran. Sampling was done by census using Time and Event Sampling methods. Research instrument was “Patient Safety Principles Checklist”. Data analysis was performed using SPSS‐20 and descriptive‐inferential statistics with a significance level of 0.05.

Results

There is no significant difference (p‐value = .15) in the level of observance of patient‐safety principles in two university‐affiliated hospitals A (133.26 ± 9.14) and B (128.16 ± 18.01). Evaluation of the mean scores obtained in each dimension and in each of the ICUs was showed that only in dimension No.3 the difference was significant (F[68,2] = 5.20, p‐value = .008) and in the AICUs (16.13 ± 1.8) (p‐value = .04), it was significantly lower than other ICUs. Identifying risk factors for the patient’s immunity reduces the side effects of patient care.

Medication errors in type 2 diabetes from patients’ perspective

Introduction

Drug errors pose a major health hazard to a number of patient populations. However, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus seem especially vulnerable to this risk as diabetes mellitus is usually concomitant with various comorbidities and polypharmacy, which present significant risk factors for the occurrence of drug errors. Despite this fact, there is little data on drug errors from patients’ perspective. The present survey aimed to examine the viewpoints of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus regarding their experiences with medication errors, the overall treatment satisfaction, and their perceptions on how a medication error was handled in daily hospital routine.

Materials and methods

Inpatients at the Department of Endocrinology and Diabetology of the University Hospital of Graz were included in the survey. Out of 100 patients, one-half had insulin therapy before hospitalization while the other half had no insulin therapy prior to admission. After giving informed consent, patients filled out a questionnaire with 22 items.

Results

Independent of their preexisting therapy, 25% of patients already suffered at least one drug error, whereby prescribing a wrong dose seemed to be the most common type of error. Furthermore, 26% of patients in the non-insulin versus 50% in the insulin group (p = 0.084) were convinced that drug errors were addressed honestly by the medical staff, while 54% in the non-insulin versus 80% in the insulin-group (p = 0.061) assumed that adequate measures were taken to prevent drug errors. Finally, 9 out of 10 patients seemed satisfied with their treatment regardless of their diabetes therapy.

Discussion/conclusion

The results of the survey clearly showed that patients experienced at least one medication error during hospitalization. However, these errors only rarely led to patient harm. The survey also revealed the value of an honest and respectful doctor-patient relationship regarding patient perception of medication errors and general complaints. Increasing patient awareness on the existing in-hospital error management systems could eliminate treatment-related concerns and create a climate of trust that is essential for effective treatment.

Exploration of an Alarm Sensor to Detect Infusion Failure Administered by Syringe Pumps

Incorrect medication administration causes millions of undesirable complications worldwide every year. The problem is severe and there are many control systems in the market, yet the exact molecular composition of the solution is not monitored. Here, we propose an alarm sensor based on UV-Vis spectroscopy and refractometry. Both methods are non-invasive and non-destructive as they utilize visible light for the analysis. Moreover, they can be used for on-site or point-of-care diagnosis. UV-Vis-spectrometer detect the absorption of light caused by an electronic transition in an atom or molecule. In contrast a refractometer measures the extent of light refraction as part of a refractive index of transparent substances. Both methods can be used for quantification of dissolved analytes in transparent substances. We show that a sensor combining both methods is capable to discern most standard medications that are used in intensive care medicine. Furthermore, an integration of the alarm sensor in already existing monitoring systems is possible.

Medication Errors at a Tertiary Hospital Intensive Care Unit

Background

The intensive care unit (ICU) generates more medication prescriptions per patient day than any other unit in the hospital. The dynamics of the ICU environment, coupled with the complexity of patient pathology, increases the risk of medication errors. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and spectrum of medication errors in an adult general ICU in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted at a 19-bed ICU in a tertiary-level hospital in Johannesburg. Data were independently collected by two of the study investigators. The doctors’ prescription and the nurses’ administration section of patient bedside charts were scrutinized for drug prescription and administration errors.

Results

Of the 656 patient days studied, 3237 drugs (5.6 drugs per patient day) were prescribed. There were a total of 359 medication errors, comprising 237 (66.0%) prescription and 122 (34.0%) administration errors. The total error rate per 1000 patient days was 621.1, while the total error rate per 1000 drug prescriptions was 110.9. The most common errors were incorrect dose prescribed (n=69, 19.2%), incorrect dosing interval prescribed (n=48, 13.4%), incorrect dose administered (n=42, 11.7%) and failure to administer the prescribed drug (n=38, 10.6%).

Conclusion

The overall occurrence of medication errors is high but is in keeping with general international trends. Targeted interventions should be implemented to minimize the frequency of medication errors in the ICU and consequent risk to patients.

Investigation of interventions to reduce nurses' medication errors in adult intensive care units: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medication errors in adult intensive care units (ICUs) are both frequent and harmful. For nurses, these errors may be multifactorial and multidisciplinary, extending from prescription stage to monitoring of patient response to medication. Therefore, diverse interventions have been developed to optimise the medication process to prevent such errors.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this systematic review was to identify research investigating interventions that may be effective in reducing the rate of nurses' medication errors in adult ICUs.

METHODS

A systematic search was undertaken of three databases: Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online, and EMCARE using a combination of key terms related to "medication errors", "nurses", "interventions", and "intensive care units". The search was limited to studies published in English between 2009 and 2019. Independent screening, quality appraisal, and data extraction were undertaken by two reviewers.

RESULTS

A total of 464 records were identified from database searches. Eleven studies met inclusion criteria: ten were quasi-experimental designs and one was a randomised controlled trial. Studies examined six types of interventions: prefilled syringes, barcode-assisted medication administration, an automated dispensing system, nursing education programs, a protocolised program logic form, and a preventive interventions program with protocols and pharmacist-supported supervision and monitoring. Findings revealed that a prefilled syringe, nurses' education programs, and the protocolised program logic form were most effective in reducing medication errors. For the barcode-assisted medication administration, automated dispensing systems, and a preventive interventions program with protocols and pharmacist-supported supervision and monitoring, results showed wide variability in effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

This review found that the evidence for effective interventions to reduce nurses' medication errors in adult ICUs is limited, due largely to inconsistencies in research design and methods. Therefore, further studies such as randomised controlled trials focusing on a single intervention are required to provide robust evidence of the effectiveness of interventions.

Describing voluntarily reported fluid therapy incidents in the care of critically ill patients: Identifying, and learning from, points of risk at the national level

Background

Fluid therapy is a common intervention in critically ill patients. Fluid therapy errors may cause harm to patients. Thus, understanding of reported fluid therapy incidents is required in order to learn from them and develop protective measures, including utilizing expertise of pharmacists and technology to improve patient safety at the national level.

Objectives

To describe fluid therapy incidents voluntarily reported in intensive care and high dependency units (ICUs) to a national incident reporting system, by investigating the error types, fluid products, consequences to patients and actions taken to alleviate them, and to identify at which phase of the medication process the incidents had occurred and had been detected.

Methods

Medication related voluntarily reported incident (n = 7623) reports were obtained from all ICUs in 2007–2017. Incidents concerning fluid therapy (n = 2201) were selected. The retrospective analysis utilized categorized data and narrative descriptions of the incidents. The results were expressed as frequencies and percentages.

Results

Most voluntarily reported incidents had occurred during the dispensing/preparing phase (n = 1306, 59%) of the medication process: a point of risk. Most incidents (n = 1975, 90%) had reached the patient and passed through many phases in the medication process and nursing shift change checks before detection. One third of the errors (n = 596, 30%) were reported to have caused consequences to patients. One quarter (n = 492, 25%) of the errors were reported to have required an additional procedure to alleviate or monitor the consequences.

Conclusions

Utilizing national incident report data enabled identifying systemic points of risk in the medication process and learning to improve patient safety. To prevent similar incidents, initial interventions should focus on the dispensing/preparing phase before implementing active medication identification procedures at each phase of the medication process and nursing shift changes. Strengthening clinical pharmacy services, utilizing technology, coordinated by IV Fluid Coordinators and Medication Safety Officers, could improve patient safety in the ICUs.

Impact of Checklist for Early Recognition and Treatment of Acute Illness on Treatment of Critically Ill Septic Patients in a Low-Resource Medical Intensive Care Unit

Introduction: Treatment of sepsis and septic shock can be a challenge even for intensive care units (ICUs) in high income countries, but it is especially difficult for ICUs with limited resources. Aim: To evaluate the impact of CERTAIN on treatment of critically ill septic patients in low-resource medical ICU. Materials and Methods: In a before-and-after study design, we compared clinical outcomes, processes, and complications (hospital acquired infections) 1 year before and 2 years after (2016 and 2017) introduction of CERTAIN. Results: A total of 125 patients with sepsis were prospectively identified for a 3-year period. Mean patient age, gender distribution, number of patients on mechanical ventilation (33 [76.7%] vs. 42 [84%] vs. 24 [75%]) and vasopressor use (23 [53.5%] vs. 34 [68%] vs. 24 [75%]) were similar before (2015) and 2 years after (2016 and 2017) the implementation of CERTAIN. Severity of illness (Simplified Acute Physiology Score II [SAPS II score]) was higher after the implementation. The checklist was incorporated in the daily practice with 100% adherence to its use. The duration of mechanical ventilation (5.3 ± 5.3 vs. 4.2 ± 3.6 vs. 3.7 ± 5.5), antibiotic treatment (8.2 ± 5.4 vs. 6.9 ± 4.1 vs. 5.8 ± 5.6), central venous catheter use (6.2 ± 5.7 vs. 5.7 ± 4.6 vs. 4.2 ± 6.1), ICU stay (8.4 ± 5.4 vs. 7.1 ± 4.1 vs. 5.8 ± 5.6), and the incidence of nosocomial infection (33.3% vs. 30% vs. 12.5%) decreased in the period after the onset of the intervention, but the results did not reach statistical significance. When adjusted for baseline characteristics, CERTAIN was not associated with hospital mortality (odds ratio 0.88, 0.38-2.04). Conclusion: CERTAIN was readily adopted in the ICU workflow and was associated with improvement in treatment of critically ill patients with sepsis.

[Contribution of a hospital pharmacy team to critical care of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2]

Le circuit du médicament hospitalier le plus sûr est la dispensation journalière individuelle nominative automatisée assurée par la pharmacie. Depuis plusieurs années nous essayons de convaincre les décideurs hospitaliers de l’implanter dans notre établissement. En attendant, pour pallier les risques d’erreurs médicamenteuses encourus par les patients et les soignants, nous avons constitué plusieurs équipes de travail au sein des unités de soins. Ces équipes sont constituées d’un pharmacien et d’un ou deux préparateurs en pharmacie hospitalière qui assurent notamment la gestion des armoires à pharmacie des unités de soins. La collaboration étroite avec médecins et personnel infirmier développée au fil des années a été un élément favorable déterminant lorsqu’il a fallu doter en médicaments et en dispositifs médicaux stériles (DMS) les nouvelles unités de soins critiques face à l’afflux de patients contaminés par le SARS-CoV2. Le suivi quotidien des médicaments consommés par patient, particulièrement les curares, et des DMS en rupture d’approvisionnement a été un élément clé de la gestion des stocks et des changements de principes actifs, de conditionnements et/ou de références de matériel. Les faits relatés donnent du poids au rapport Claris qui souligne les effets positifs en termes de qualité et de sécurité de prise en charge des patients du travail des PPH et pharmaciens dans les unités de soins. Ils soulignent par ailleurs les dangers auxquels sont exposés patients et soignants samedi, dimanche et jours fériés quand la pharmacie est fermée. Ils légitiment la question de l’extension de l’ouverture de la pharmacie en équipe complète 365 jours par an.

Prevalence and Nature of Medication Errors and Preventable Adverse Drug Events in Paediatric and Neonatal Intensive Care Settings: A Systematic Review

INTRODUCTION

Children admitted to paediatric and neonatal intensive care units may be at high risk from medication errors and preventable adverse drug events.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this systematic review was to review empirical studies examining the prevalence and nature of medication errors and preventable adverse drug events in paediatric and neonatal intensive care units.

DATA SOURCES

Seven electronic databases were searched between January 2000 and March 2019.

STUDY SELECTION

Quantitative studies that examined medication errors/preventable adverse drug events using direct observation, medication chart review, or a mixture of methods in children ≤ 18 years of age admitted to paediatric or neonatal intensive care units were included.

DATA EXTRACTION

Data on study design, detection method used, rates and types of medication errors/preventable adverse drug events, and medication classes involved were extracted.

RESULTS

Thirty-five unique studies were identified for inclusion. In paediatric intensive care units, the median rate of medication errors was 14.6 per 100 medication orders (interquartile range 5.7-48.8%, n = 3) and between 6.4 and 9.1 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). In neonatal intensive care units, medication error rates ranged from 4 to 35.1 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2) and from 5.5 to 77.9 per 100 medication orders (n = 2). In both settings, prescribing and medication administration errors were found to be the most common medication errors, with dosing errors the most frequently reported error subtype. Preventable adverse drug event rates were reported in three paediatric intensive care unit studies as 2.3 per 100 patients (n = 1) and 21-29 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). In neonatal intensive care units, preventable adverse drug event rates from three studies were 0.86 per 1000 doses (n = 1) and 0.47-14.38 per 1000 patient-days (n = 2). Anti-infective agents were commonly involved with medication errors/preventable adverse drug events in both settings.

CONCLUSIONS

Medication errors occur frequently in critically ill children admitted to paediatric and neonatal intensive care units and may lead to patient harm. Important targets such as dosing errors and anti-infective medications were identified to guide the development of remedial interventions.

Are nursing infusion practices delivering full-dose antimicrobial treatment?

Antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) has developed over the past decade as a critical tool to promote the appropriate use of antimicrobials in order to contain antimicrobial resistance (AMR) and conserve antimicrobial medicines. Current literature supports the role of the nurse in AMR, with a strong focus on the responsibilities of the nurse in infection prevention and control (IPC), both in the formal role of the IPC nurse specialist, and the more general IPC role of the bedside nurse. There is also growing support for the collaborative role of the nurse in the multidisciplinary AMS team. There is, however, very little literature examining the clinical practice role of the nurse in AMS. In this discussion, we contend that nursing practice may unknowingly contribute to AMR owing to varying methods of administration of intermittent intravenous infusions, resulting in under-dosing of antimicrobial medicines.

Direct Observation of Medication Errors in Critical Care Setting: A Systematic Review

Medication errors continue to be an issue for the critically ill and are costly to both patients and health care facilities. This article reviews published research about these errors and reports results of observational studies. The types of errors, incidence, and root causes have been considered along with adverse consequences. The implications for bedside practice as a result of this review are fairly straightforward. Medication errors are happening at an alarming rate in the critical care environment, and these errors are preventable. It is imperative that all personnel respect and follow established guidelines and procedural safeguards to ensure flawless drug delivery to patients.

Reducing medication errors in critical care patients: pharmacist key resources and relationship with medicines optimisation

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are the most common type of medical errors critical care patients experience. Critical care units utilise a variety of resources to reduce medication errors; it is unknown which resources or combinations thereof are most effective in improving medication safety.

OBJECTIVES

To obtain UK critical care pharmacist group consensus on the most important interventions/resources that reduce medication errors. To then classify units that participated in the PROTECTED UK study to investigate if there were significant differences in the reported pharmacist prescription intervention type, clinical impact and rates according to unit resource classification.

METHODS

An e-Delphi process (three rounds) obtained pharmacist consensus on which interventions/resources were most important in the reduction of medication errors in critical care patients. The 21 units involved in the PROTECTED UK study (multicentre study of UK critical care pharmacist medicines interventions), were categorised as high-, medium- and low-resource units based on routine delivery of the final Top 5 interventions/ resources. High and low units were compared according to type, clinical impact and rate of medication interventions reported during the PROTECTED UK study.

KEY FINDINGS

Consensus on the Top 5 combined medication error reduction resources was established: advanced-level clinical pharmacist embedded in critical care being ranked most important. Pharmacists working on units with high resources made significantly more clinically significant medicines optimisations compared to those on low-resourced units (OR 3.09; P = 0.035).

CONCLUSIONS

Critical care pharmacist group consensus on the most important medication error reduction resources was established. Pharmacists working on high-resourced units made more clinically significant medicines optimisations.

Reliability of clinical impact grading by healthcare professionals of common prescribing error and optimisation cases in critical care patients

Objective

To identify between and within profession-rater reliability of clinical impact grading for common critical care prescribing error and optimisation cases. To identify representative clinical impact grades for each individual case.

Design

Electronic questionnaire.

Setting

5 UK NHS Trusts.

Participants

30 Critical care healthcare professionals (doctors, pharmacists and nurses).

Intervention

Participants graded severity of clinical impact (5-point categorical scale) of 50 error and 55 optimisation cases.

Main Outcome Measures

Case between and within profession-rater reliability and modal clinical impact grading.

Methods

Between and within profession rater reliability analysis used linear mixed model and intraclass correlation, respectively.

Results

The majority of error and optimisation cases (both 76%) had a modal clinical severity grade of moderate or higher. Error cases: doctors graded clinical impact significantly lower than pharmacists (-0.25; P < 0.001) and nurses (-0.53; P < 0.001), with nurses significantly higher than pharmacists (0.28; P < 0.001). Optimisation cases: doctors graded clinical impact significantly lower than nurses and pharmacists (-0.39 and -0.5; P < 0.001, respectively). Within profession reliability grading was excellent for pharmacists (0.88 and 0.89; P < 0.001) and doctors (0.79 and 0.83; P < 0.001) but only fair to good for nurses (0.43 and 0.74; P < 0.001), for optimisation and error cases, respectively.

Conclusions

Representative clinical impact grades for over 100 common prescribing error and optimisation cases are reported for potential clinical practice and research application. The between professional variability highlights the importance of multidisciplinary perspectives in assessment of medication error and optimisation cases in clinical practice and research.