Frequency, types, and direct related costs of medication errors in an academic nephrology ward in Iran

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.

Do junior doctors make more prescribing errors than experienced doctors when prescribing electronically using a computerised physician order entry system combined with a clinical decision support system? A cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

Prescribing errors can lead to inconvenience, morbidity and mortality. It is therefore crucial to educate doctors to prescribe safely, efficiently and effectively. To create an effective educational programme, it is essential to understand which errors are made and by whom. The aim of this study is to explore if the experience level of the doctor influences how many and which prescribing errors are made in a European academic teaching hospital, where a computerised physician order entry system (CPOE) with a clinical decision support system (CDSS) is exclusively used.

METHODS

Prescriptions for all inpatients in an academic teaching hospital were collected in June 2021. All prescriptions with an alert generated by the CDSS which could not be handled by a pharmacy technician according to local protocol were checked for errors. Identified errors were categorised by type and severity.

RESULTS

A total of 130 538 prescriptions were newly made or altered by doctors. Of these prescriptions, 1914 (1.5%) were retained for a check by the pharmacist. These contained 430 prescribing errors (0.3% of total prescriptions). Doctors not in specialty training and those in specialty training made more prescribing errors than consultants (0.5% and 0.5% vs 0.1%; p<0.001). Doctors in specialty training made relatively more drug-drug interaction errors than consultants (n=31 (16%) vs n=3 (3%), p<0.05). No significant difference was found regarding the severity of the errors.

CONCLUSIONS

Doctors not in specialty training and doctors in specialty training, who are the less experienced doctors, make more prescribing errors than consultants, even with the use of a CPOE combined with CDSS. The type of errors differ between doctors of different experience levels. This finding provides a solid basis for specific additional education to medical students, doctors not in specialty training and doctors in specialty training.

Hypoglycemia risk with inappropriate dosing of glucose-lowering drugs in patients with chronic kidney disease: a retrospective cohort study

The incidence rates and consequences of inappropriate dosing of glucose-lowering drugs remain limited in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). A retrospective cohort study was conducted to estimate the frequency of inappropriate dosing of glucose-lowering drugs and to evaluate the subsequent risk of hypoglycemia in outpatients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of < 50 mL/min/1.73 m². Outpatient visits were divided according to whether the prescription of glucose-lowering drugs included dose adjustment according to eGFR or not. A total of 89,628 outpatient visits were included, 29.3% of which received inappropriate dosing. The incidence rates of the composite of all hypoglycemia were 76.71 and 48.51 events per 10,000 person-months in the inappropriate dosing group and in appropriate dosing group, respectively. After multivariate adjustment, inappropriate dosing was found to lead to an increased risk of composite of all hypoglycemia (hazard ratio 1.52, 95% confidence interval 1.34, 1.73). In the subgroup analysis, there were no significant changes in the risk of hypoglycemia regardless of renal function (eGFR < 30 vs. 30-50 mL/min/1.73 m²). In conclusion, inappropriate dosing of glucose-lowering drugs in patients with CKD is common and associated with a higher risk of hypoglycemia.

Prevalence of medication administration errors in hospitalized adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis up to 2017 to explore sources of heterogeneity

Previous estimates to meta-analyze administration error rates were limited by the high statistical heterogeneity, restricting their use. This study aimed to investigate sources of heterogeneity in pooled administration error rates in hospitalized adults. We systematically searched scientific databases up to November 2017 for studies presenting error rates/relevant numerical data in hospitalized adults. We conducted separate meta-analyses for the numerators: One Medication Error (OME) (each dose can be correct or incorrect) and Total Number of Errors (TNE) (more than one error per dose could be counted), using the generic inverse variance with a 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² and Cochran's Q test. We meta-analyzed 33 studies. The global pooled analyses based on the OME and TNE numerators showed very high heterogeneity (I²  = 100%; p < 0.00001). For each meta-analysis, subgroup analyses based on study characteristics (countries, wards, population, routes of administration, error detection methods, and medications) yielded results with consistently elevated heterogeneity. Beyond these characteristics, we stratified the studies according to the mean error prevalence level as the threshold. Based on the OME numerator, we identified two subgroups of low (0.15[0.13-0.17]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.43) and high (0.26[0.24-0.27]; I²  = 38%; p = 0.17) pooled prevalence rates, with controlled heterogeneity. Similarly, for the TNE numerator, we identified two subgroups of low (0.10[0.09-0.10]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.76) and high (0.28[0.27-0.29]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.89) pooled prevalence rates, with controlled heterogeneity. These subgroups differed regarding the denominators used: Total opportunities for errors versus others (doses, observations, administrations). Calculation methods, specifically the denominator, seem a primary factor in explaining heterogeneity in error rates. Standardizing numerators, denominators, and definitions is necessary.

A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of the Medical Error Rate in Iran: 2005-2019

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Medical errors (MEs) are one of the main factors affecting the quality of hospital services and reducing patient safety in health care systems, especially in developing countries. The aim of this study was to determine the rate of ME in Iran.

METHODS

This is a systematic literature review and meta-analysis of extracted data. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus, Cochrane, SID, Magiran, and Medlib were searched in Persian and English, using a combination of medical subject heading terms ("Medical Error" [Mesh] OR "Medication error" [Mesh] OR "Hospital Error" AND ("Iran" [Mesh]) for observational and interventional studies that reported ME rate in Iran from January 1995 to April 2019. We followed the STROBE checklist for the purpose of this review.

RESULTS

The search yielded a total of 435 records, of which 74 articles were included in the systematic review. The rate of MEs in Iran was determined as 0.35%. The rates of errors among physicians and nurses were 31% and 37%, respectively. The error rates during the medication process, including prescription, recording, and administration, were 31%, 27%, and 35%, respectively. Also, incidence of MEs in night shifts was higher than in any other shift (odds ratio [OR] = 38%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 31%-45%). Moreover, newer nurses were responsible for more errors within hospitals than other nurses (OR = 57%; 95% CI: 41%-80%). The rate of reported error after the Health Transformation Plan was higher than before the Health Transformation Plan (OR = 40%; CI: 33%-49% vs OR = 30%; CI: 25%-35%).

CONCLUSION

This systematic review has demonstrated the high ME rate in Iranian hospitals. Based on the error rate attributed solely to night shifts, more attention to the holistic treatment process is required. Errors can be decreased through a variety of strategies, such as training clinical and support staff regarding safe practices and updating and adapting systems and technologies.

The Impact of Clinical Pharmacist Interventions on Medication Errors Management in the Postoperative Cardiac Intensive Care Unit

Background: Medication errors (MEs) frequently occur in intensive care unit (ICU) admittedpatients. The present study aimed to evaluate the frequency and types of MEs in an open heartsurgery heart ICU and clinical pharmacists’ role in the management of them. Methods: This cross-sectional, observational study was performed from October 2016 toMarch 2017 in the Shahid Madani Heart Center. A clinical pharmacist reviewed patients’ files,laboratory data, and physician orders during morning hours. All of the MEs and the clinicalpharmacies’ recommendations for the management of them were analyzed. Results: A total of 311 MEs were observed in the medical files of 152 patients. The rate of MEswas 2.04 errors per patient and 0.19 errors per ordered medication. The acceptance rate of MEswas 72.6%. The most type of MEs was ‘forgot to order’ (75 cases, 24.1%) followed by "wrongfrequency" and "adding a drug" in 56 (18%) and 49 (15.8) patients, respectively. Most MEs wereinsignificant. Conclusion: MEs occur at different stages of the therapeutic process in the postoperative cardiacintensive care unit, and clinical pharmacists play an essential role in detecting and managingMEs.

Cost-saving medication therapy management for outpatients

Objective:

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

Materials and Methods:

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

Results:

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

Discussion and Conclusion:

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

Medication errors in hospitals in the Middle East: a systematic review of prevalence, nature, severity and contributory factors

PURPOSE

The aim was to critically appraise, synthesise and present the evidence of medication errors amongst hospitalised patients in Middle Eastern countries, specifically prevalence, nature, severity and contributory factors.

METHODS

CINAHL, Embase, Medline, Pubmed and Science Direct were searched for studies published in English from 2000 to March 2018, with no exclusions. Study selection, quality assessment (using adapted STROBE checklists) and data extraction were conducted independently by two reviewers. A narrative approach to data synthesis was adopted; data related to error causation were synthesised according to Reason's Accident Causation model.

RESULTS

Searching yielded 452 articles, which were reduced to 50 following removal of duplicates and screening of titles, abstracts and full-papers. Studies were largely from Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. Thirty-two studies quantified errors; definitions of 'medication error' were inconsistent as were approaches to data collection, severity assessment, outcome measures and analysis. Of 13 studies reporting medication errors per 'total number of medication orders'/ 'number of prescriptions', the median across all studies was 10% (IQR 2-35). Twenty-four studies reported contributory factors leading to errors. Synthesis according to Reason's model identified the most common being active failures, largely slips (10 studies); lapses (9) and mistakes (12); error-provoking conditions, particularly lack of knowledge (13) and insufficient staffing levels (13) and latent conditions, commonly heavy workload (9).

CONCLUSION

There is a need to improve the quality and reporting of studies from Middle Eastern countries. A standardised approach to quantifying medication errors' prevalence, severity, outcomes and contributory factors is warranted.

Detection and Management of Common Medication Errors in Internal Medicine Wards: Impact on Medication Costs and Patient Care

Purpose: Medication errors (MEs) are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality, yet they have remained as confusing and underappreciated concept. The complex pharmacotherapy in hospitalized patients necessitates continued report and surveillance of MEs as well as persistent pharmaceutical care. This study evaluated the frequency, types, clinical significance, and costs of MEs in internal medicine wards. Methods: In this 8-month prospective and cross-sectional study, an attending clinical pharmacist visited the patients during each physician's ward round at the morning. All MEs including prescription, transcription, and administration errors were detected, recorded, and subsequently appropriate corrective interventions were proposed during these rounds. The changes in the medications' cost after implementing clinical pharmacist's interventions were compared to the calculated medications' cost, assuming that the MEs would not have been detected by clinical pharmacist and continued up to discharge time of the patients. Results: 89% of the patients experienced at least one ME during their hospitalization. A mean of 2.6 errors per patient or 0.2 errors per ordered medication occurred in this study. More than 70% of MEs happened at the prescription stage by treating physicians. The most prevalent prescription errors were inappropriate drug selection, unauthorized drugs and untreated indication. The highest MEs occurred on cardiovascular agents followed by antibiotics, and vitamins, minerals, and electrolytes. The net effect of clinical pharmacist's contributions in medication therapy management was to decline medications' costs by 33.9%. Conclusion: The role of clinical pharmacy services in detection, prevention and reducing the cost of MEs is of paramount importance to internal medicine wards.

Clinical and economic impacts of clinical pharmacists' interventions in Iran: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

There are many studies about Iranian clinical pharmacists' interventions and their impacts on medication safety and cost. The aim of this study is to collect data and critically evaluate the clinical and economic effects of Iranian clinical pharmacist interventions and activities. To our best of knowledge, this research is the first review of publications about Iranian clinical pharmacists' interventions and activities.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

Six online databases, including PubMed, Scopus, Medline, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systemic Reviews, and Google Scholar were searched using the terms '"Iranian", "clinical pharmacist", 'adverse drug reactions", "medication errors", "drug interaction", "drug utilization evaluation", "cost", and "interventions" for English studies conducted in Iran and described clinical pharmacist-initiated interventions, published before December 2018. The search and extraction process followed PRISMA guidelines. Observational or retrospective studies, clinical trials, congress abstracts, and case reports or case series were excluded. The search strategy after full-text review identified 39 articles matching the eligibility criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-nine articles were recruited. They included establishing pharmaceutical care in out-patient clinics and drug information centers (n = 4); prevention, detection, and management of adverse drug reactions(n = 4), designing protocols and improving drug utilization pattern(n = 16), prevention, detection, and management of medication errors (n = 11), and all clinical pharmacist services(n = 4). Most clinical pharmacist interventions and activities were regarding designing protocols, improving drug utilization pattern, as well as detection, prevention, and management of medication errors. About three-fourth (74.35%) of included studies were from either ambulatory care or in-patient settings in Tehran. The median (interquartile range) duration of intervention as well as follow-up phases was 9 (5) months.

CONCLUSION

Data of our review support the beneficial role of clinical pharmacists in the improvement of quality, safety, and efficiency of patients' pharmaceutical care in Iran. Graphical abstract Clinical pharmacists' interventions in Iran.

The cost-saving effect and prevention of medication errors by clinical pharmacist intervention in a nephrology unit

Medication errors may lead to adverse drug events (ADEs), which endangers patient safety and increases healthcare-related costs. The on-ward deployment of clinical pharmacists has been shown to reduce preventable ADEs, and save costs. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ADEs prevention and cost-saving effects by clinical pharmacist deployment in a nephrology ward.This was a retrospective study, which compared the number of pharmacist interventions 1 year before and after a clinical pharmacist was deployed in a nephrology ward. The clinical pharmacist attended ward rounds, reviewed and revised all medication orders, and gave active recommendations of medication use. For intervention analysis, the numbers and types of the pharmacist's interventions in medication orders and the active recommendations were compared. For cost analysis, both estimated cost saving and avoidance were calculated and compared.The total numbers of pharmacist interventions in medication orders were 824 in 2012 (preintervention), and 1977 in 2013 (postintervention). The numbers of active recommendation were 40 in 2012, and 253 in 2013. The estimated cost savings in 2012 and 2013 were NT$52,072 and NT$144,138, respectively. The estimated cost avoidances of preventable ADEs in 2012 and 2013 were NT$3,383,700 and NT$7,342,200, respectively. The benefit/cost ratio increased from 4.29 to 9.36, and average admission days decreased by 2 days after the on-ward deployment of a clinical pharmacist.The number of pharmacist's interventions increased dramatically after her on-ward deployment. This service could reduce medication errors, preventable ADEs, and costs of both medications and potential ADEs.

Economic impact of medication error: a systematic review

PURPOSE

Medication error is a significant source of morbidity and mortality among patients. Clinical and cost-effectiveness evidence are required for the implementation of quality of care interventions. Reduction of error-related cost is a key potential benefit of interventions addressing medication error. The aim of this review was to describe and quantify the economic burden associated with medication error.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane, Embase, CINAHL, EconLit, ABI/INFORM, Business Source Complete were searched. Studies published 2004-2016 assessing the economic impact of medication error were included. Cost values were expressed in Euro 2015. A narrative synthesis was performed.

RESULTS

A total of 4572 articles were identified from database searching, and 16 were included in the review. One study met all applicable quality criteria. Fifteen studies expressed economic impact in monetary terms. Mean cost per error per study ranged from €2.58 to €111 727.08. Healthcare costs were used to measure economic impact in 15 of the included studies with one study measuring litigation costs. Four studies included costs incurred in primary care with the remaining 12 measuring hospital costs. Five studies looked at general medication error in a general population with 11 studies reporting the economic impact of an individual type of medication error or error within a specific patient population.

CONCLUSIONS

Considerable variability existed between studies in terms of financial cost, patients, settings and errors included. Many were of poor quality. Assessment of economic impact was conducted predominantly in the hospital setting with little assessment of primary care impact. Limited parameters were used to establish economic impact. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

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.

The role of medications and their management in acute kidney injury

Prior to 2002, the incidence of acute renal failure (ARF) varied as there was no standard definition. To better understand its incidence and etiology and to develop treatment and prevention strategies, while moving research forward, the Acute Dialysis Quality Initiative workgroup developed the RIFLE (risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage kidney disease) classification. After continued data suggesting that even small increases in serum creatinine lead to worse outcomes, the Acute Kidney Injury Network (AKIN) modified the RIFLE criteria and used the term acute kidney injury (AKI) instead of ARF. These classification and staging systems provide the clinician and researcher a starting point for refining the understanding and treatment of AKI. An important initial step in evaluating AKI is determining the likely location of injury, generally classified as prerenal, renal, or postrenal. There is no single biomarker or test that definitively defines the mechanism of the injury. Identifying the insult(s) requires a thorough assessment of the patient and their medical and medication histories. Prerenal injuries arise primarily due to renal hypoperfusion. This may be the result of systemic or focal conditions or secondary to the effects of drugs such as nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, calcineurin inhibitors (CIs), and modulators of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. Renal, or intrinsic, injury is an overarching term that represents complex conditions leading to considerable damage to a component of the intrinsic renal system (renal tubules, glomerulus, vascular structures, inter-stitium, or renal tubule obstruction). Acute tubular necrosis and acute interstitial nephritis are the more common types of intrinsic renal injury. Each type of injury has several drugs that are implicated as a possible cause, with antiinfectives being the most common. Postrenal injuries that result from obstruction block the flow of urine, leading to hydronephrosis and subsequent damage to the renal parenchyma. Drugs associated with tubular obstruction include acyclovir, methotrexate, and several antiretrovirals. Renal recovery from drug-induced AKI begins once the offending agent has been removed, if clinically possible, and is complete in most cases. It is uncommon that renal replacement therapy will be needed while recovery occurs. Pharmacists can play a pivotal role in identifying possible causes of drug-induced AKI and limit their toxic effect by identifying those most likely to cause or contribute to injury. Dose adjustment is critical during changes in renal function, and the pharmacist can ensure that optimal therapy is provided during this critical time.