An analysis of errors, discrepancies, and variation in opioid prescriptions for adult outpatients at a teaching hospital

Experiences and Outcomes of Using e-Prescribing for Opioids: Rapid Scoping Review

BACKGROUND

e-Prescribing is designed to assist in facilitating safe and appropriate prescriptions for patients. Currently, it is unknown to what extent e-prescribing for opioids influences experiences and outcomes. To address this gap, a rapid scoping review was conducted.

OBJECTIVE

This rapid scoping review aims to (1) explore how e-prescribing has been used clinically; (2) examine the effects of e-prescribing on clinical outcomes, the patient or clinician experience, service delivery, and policy; and (3) identify current gaps in the present literature to inform future studies and recommendations.

METHODS

A rapid scoping review was conducted following the guidance of the JBI 2020 scoping review methodology and the World Health Organization guide to rapid reviews. A comprehensive literature search was completed by an expert librarian from inception until November 16, 2022. Three databases were electronically searched: MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), and Scopus (Elsevier). The search criteria were as follows: (1) e-prescribing programs targeted to the use or misuse of opioids, including those that were complemented or accompanied by clinically focused initiatives, and (2) a primary research study of experimental, quasi-experimental, observational, qualitative, or mixed methods design. An additional criterion of an ambulatory component of e-prescribing (eg, e-prescribing occurred upon discharge from acute care) was added at the full-text stage. No language limitations or filters were applied. All articles were double screened by trained reviewers. Gray literature was manually searched by a single reviewer. Data were synthesized using a descriptive approach.

RESULTS

Upon completing screening, 34 articles met the inclusion criteria: 32 (94%) peer-reviewed studies and 2 (6%) gray literature documents (1 thesis study and 1 report). All 33 studies had a quantitative component, with most highlighting e-prescribing from acute care settings to community settings (n=12, 36%). Only 1 (3%) of the 34 articles provided evidence on e-prescribing in a primary care setting. Minimal prescriber, pharmacist, and clinical population characteristics were reported. The main outcomes identified were related to opioid prescribing rates, alerts (eg, adverse drug events and drug-drug interactions), the quantity and duration of opioid prescriptions, the adoption of e-prescribing technology, attitudes toward e-prescribing, and potential challenges with the implementation of e-prescribing into clinical practice. e-Prescribing, including key features such as alerts and dose order sets, may reduce prescribing errors.

CONCLUSIONS

This rapid scoping review highlights initial promising results with e-prescribing and opioid therapy management. It is important that future work explores the experience of prescribers, pharmacists, and patients using e-prescribing for opioid therapy management with an emphasis on prescribers in the community and primary care. Developing a common set of quality indicators for e-prescribing of opioids will help build a stronger evidence base. Understanding implementation considerations will be of importance as the technology is integrated into clinical practice and health systems.

Prevalence, contributing factors, and interventions to reduce medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are common events that compromise patient safety. Outpatient and ambulatory settings enhance access to healthcare which has been linked to favorable outcomes. While medication errors have been extensively researched in inpatient settings, there is dearth of literature from outpatient settings.

AIM

To synthesize the peer-reviewed literature on the prevalence, nature, contributory factors, and interventions to minimize medication errors in outpatient and ambulatory settings.

METHOD

A systematic review was conducted using Medline, Embase, CINAHL, and Google Scholar which were searched from 2011 to November 2021. Quality assessment was conducted using the quality assessment checklist for prevalence studies tool. Data related to contributory factors were synthesized according to Reason's accident causation model.

RESULTS

Twenty-four articles were included in the review. Medication errors were common in outpatient and ambulatory settings (23-92% of prescribed drugs). Prescribing errors were the most common type of errors reported (up to 91% of the prescribed drugs, high variations in the data), with dosing errors being most prevalent (up to 41% of the prescribed drugs). Latent conditions, largely due to inadequate knowledge, were common contributory factors followed by active failures. The seven studies that discussed interventions were of poor quality and none used a randomized design.

CONCLUSION

Medication errors (particularly prescribing errors and dosing errors) in outpatient settings are prevalent, although reported prevalence range is wide. Future research should be informed by behavioral theories and should use high quality designs. These interventions should encompass system-level strategies, multidisciplinary collaborations, effective integration of pharmacists, health information technology, and educational programs.

A systematic review of data elements of computerized physician order entry (CPOE): mapping the data to FHIR

OBJECTIVE

Medication errors are the third leading cause of death. There are several methods to prevent prescription errors, one of which is to use a Computerized Physician Order Entry system (CPOE). In a CPOE system, necessary data needs to be collected so that making decisions about prescribing medications and treatment plans could be made. Although many CPOE systems have been developed worldwide, studies have yet to identify the necessary data and data elements of CPOE systems. This study aims to identify data elements of CPOE and standardize these data with Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources (FHIR) to facilitate data sharing and integration with the electronic health record (EHR) system and reduce data diversity.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Scopus databases for studies up to October 2019 were searched. Two reviewers independently assessed original articles to determine eligibility for inclusion in this review. All articles describing data elements of a COPE system were included. Data elements were obtained from the included articles' text, tables, and figures.Classification of the extracted data elements and mapping them to FHIR was done to facilitate data sharing and integration with the electronic health record (EHR) system and reduce data diversity. The final data elements of CPOE were categorized into five main categories of FHIR (foundation, base, clinical, financial, and specialized) and 146 resources, where possible. One of the researchers did mapping and checked and verified by the second researcher. If a data element could not be mapped to any FHIR resources, this data element was considered an extension to the most relevant resource.

RESULTS

We retrieved 5162 articles through database searches. After the full-text assessment, 21 articles were included. In total, 270 data elements were identified and mapped to the FHIR standard. These elements have been reported in 26 FHIR resources of 146 ones (18%). In total, 71 data elements were considered an extension.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study showed that the same data elements were not used in the CPOE systems, and the degree of homogeneity of these systems is limited. The mapping of extracted data with data elements used in the FHIR standard shows the extent to which these systems comply with existing standards. Considering the standards in these systems' design helps developers design more coherent systems that can share data with other systems.

Factors Associated With Postoperative Opioid Prescribing After Primary Elective Cesarean Section

INTRODUCTION

Guidelines indicate the need to balance the risks of opioid prescribing with the need to adequately manage pain after cesarean section (CS). Although guidelines suggest the need for tailored opioid prescribing, it is unclear whether providers currently tailor opioid prescribing practices given patient-related factors. Thus, research is needed to first understand post-CS pain management and opioid prescribing. The objective of the present study was to identify factors related to CS discharge opioid prescriptions.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was approved by the Brooke Army Medical Center Institutional Review Board (San Antonio, Texas; #C.2020.094e) on June 23, 2020. Electronic health record data of healthy adult women undergoing primary elective CS, performed under regional neuraxial anesthesia at a single, academic, tertiary medical center from 2018 to 2019, were included. Multivariable regression examined patient and medical factors associated with post-CS opioid prescriptions.

RESULTS

In the present sample (N = 169), 23% (n = 39) of patients did not use opioids postoperatively, while inpatient and almost all of those patients (n = 36) received a discharge prescription for opioids with a median amount of 225 morphine milligram equivalent doses. There was a lack of evidence indicating that patient and medical factors were associated with discharge opioid dose.

CONCLUSION

Patient and medical factors were not associated with post-CS opioid prescribing. Larger studies are needed to better elucidate optimal post-CS pain management in the days and months that follow CS. Such findings are needed to better tailor opioid prescribing, consistent with clinical practice guidelines.

An Analysis of Judicial Cases Concerning Analgesic-Related Medication Errors in the Republic of Korea

OBJECTIVES

Analgesic-related medication errors can be a threat to patient safety. This study aimed to identify and describe medication errors that can cause serious adverse drug events (ADEs) related to analgesic use.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational, medicolegal study analyzed closed cases concerning complications induced by medication errors involving 3 commonly used analgesics: opioids, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), and acetaminophen (AAP). Cases closed between 1994 and 2019 that were available in the Korean Supreme Court judgment database system were included. Medication errors were categorized using a classification system (developed by our group) based on the stage of drug administration. Clinical characteristics and judgment statuses were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 71 cases were included in the final analysis (opioids, n = 30; NSAIDs, n = 35; AAP, n = 6). Among them, 43 claims (60.6%) resulted in payments to the plaintiffs, with a median payment of $86,607 (interquartile range, $34,554-$193,782). The severity of ADEs was high (National Association of Insurance Commissioners scale ≥6) in 88.7% (n = 63) of claims, with a total of 44 (62%) deaths. The most common types of ADEs associated with opioid, NSAID, and AAP use were respiratory depression, anaphylactic shock, and fulminant hepatitis, respectively. The most common recognized medication errors associated with opioid, NSAIDs, and AAP were inappropriate patient monitoring (n = 10; 33.3%), improper analgesic choice (n = 15; 42.9%), and inappropriate treatment after ADEs (n = 3; 50%), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings indicate that efforts should be made to reduce medication errors related to analgesic use to prevent permanent injury and potential malpractice claims.

Threats to Narcotic Safety-A Narrative Review of Narcotic Incidents, Discrepancies and Near-Misses Within a Large Canadian Health System

Background

Canada is currently experiencing an opioid crisis.

Purpose

Nurses are the largest number of frontline healthcare professionals in Canada who administer narcotic pharmacotherapy, hence, they are ideally placed to improve narcotic stewardship in hospitals. Our study aims to understand the characteristics of narcotic incidents and hence recommend interventions for narcotic stewardship.

Methods

Our study was conducted within a 442-bed academic health sciences center in Ontario. We extracted anonymized narcotic incident reports which occurred over a 3-year period from the SAFER System. Descriptive statistics were utilized to analyze narcotic incidents and their contributory factors.

Results

272 narcotic incident reports were submitted to SAFER within the study period. Most incidents (51%) involved hydromorphone and morphine and were primarily categorized as Level I (n = 154) and Level II (n = 60). Incorrect narcotic dosing (44%), and narcotic count discrepancies (27%) were most commonly reported with active failures being the most commonly reported contributory factors such as failure to review medication orders prior to narcotic administration.

Conclusions

Nurses have an important role in narcotic safety as an intermediary between narcotic administration and incident reporting. Further research is needed to understand the enablers, barriers and opportunities for nurses and other healthcare professionals to improve narcotic stewardship.

Incidence and Variables Associated With Inconsistencies in Opioid Prescribing at Hospital Discharge and Its Associated Adverse Drug Outcomes

OBJECTIVES

Opioid-related medication errors (MEs) can have a significant impact on patient health and contribute to opioid misuse. The objective of this study was to estimate the incidence of and variables associated with the receipt of an opioid prescription and opioid-related MEs (omissions, duplications, or dose changes) at hospital discharge. We also determined rates of adverse drug events and risks of emergency department visits, readmissions, or death 30 days and 90 days post discharge associated with MEs.

METHODS

A cohort of hospitalized patients discharged from the McGill University Health Centre between 2014 and 2016 was assembled. The impact of opioid-related MEs was assessed in a propensity score-adjusted logistic regression models. Multivariable logistic regression was used to determine characteristics associated with MEs and discharge opioid prescription.

RESULTS

A total of 1530 (43.9%) of 3486 patients were prescribed opioids, of which 13.4% (n = 205) of patients had at least 1 opioid-related ME. Rates of MEs were higher in handwritten prescriptions compared to the electronic reconciliation discharge prescription group (20.6% vs 1.2%). Computer-based prescriptions were associated with a 69% lower risk of opioid-related MEs (adjusted odds ratio: 0.31, 95% confidence interval: 0.14-0.65) as well as 63% lower risk of receiving an opioid prescription. Opioid-related MEs were associated with a 2.3 times increased risk of healthcare utilization in the 30 days postdischarge period (adjusted odds ratio: 2.32, 95% confidence interval: 1.24-4.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-related MEs are common in handwritten discharge prescriptions. Our findings highlight the need for computer-based prescribing platforms and careful review of medications during critical periods of care such as hospital transitions.

Optimizing opioid prescribing and pain treatment for surgery: Review and conceptual framework

Purpose

Millions of Americans who undergo surgical procedures receive opioid prescriptions as they return home. While some derive great benefit from these medicines, others experience adverse events, convert to chronic opioid use, or have unused medicines that serve as a reservoir for potential nonmedical use. Our aim was to investigate concepts and methods relevant to optimal opioid prescribing and pain treatment in the perioperative period.

Methods

We reviewed existing literature for trials on factors that influence opioid prescribing and optimization of pain treatment for surgical procedures and generated a conceptual framework to guide future quality, safety, and research efforts.

Results

Opioid prescribing and pain treatment after discharge from surgery broadly consist of 3 key interacting perspectives, including those of the patient, the perioperative team, and, serving in an essential role for all patients, the pharmacist. Systems-based factors, ranging from the organizational environment’s ability to provide multimodal analgesia and participation in enhanced recovery after surgery programs to other healthcare system and macro-level trends, shape these interactions and influence opioid-related safety outcomes.

Conclusions

The severity and persistence of the opioid crisis underscore the urgent need for interventions to improve postoperative prescription opioid use in the United States. Such interventions are likely to be most effective, with the fewest unintended consequences, if based on sound evidence and built on multidisciplinary efforts that include pharmacists, nurses, surgeons, anesthesiologists, and the patient. Future studies have the potential to identify the optimal amount to prescribe, improve patient-focused safety and quality outcomes, and help curb the oversupply of opioids that contributes to the most pressing public health crisis of our time.

The prescription opioid crisis: role of the anaesthesiologist in reducing opioid use and misuse

Reports of strategies to prevent and treat the opioid epidemic are growing. Significant attention has been paid to the benefits of opioid addiction research, clinical prescribing, and public policy initiatives in curbing the epidemic. However, the role of the anaesthesiologist in minimising opioid use and misuse remains underexplored. For many patients with an opioid use disorder, the perioperative period represents the source of initial exposure. As perioperative physicians, anaesthesiologists are in the unique position to manage pain effectively while simultaneously decreasing opioid consumption. Multiple opportunities exist for anaesthesiologists to minimise opioid exposure and prevent subsequent persistent opioid use. We present a global strategy for decreasing perioperative opioid use and misuse among surgical patients. A historical perspective of the opioid epidemic is presented, together with an analysis of opioid supply and demand forces. We then present specific temporal strategies for opioid use reduction in the perioperative period. We emphasise the importance of preoperative identification of patients at risk for long-term opioid use and misuse, review the evidence supporting the opioid sparing capacity of individual multimodal analgesic agents, and discuss the benefits of regional anaesthesia for minimising opioid consumption. We describe postoperative and post-discharge tools, including effective multimodal analgesia and the role of a transitional pain service. Finally, we offer general institutional strategies that can be led by anaesthesiologists, identify gaps in knowledge, and offer directions for future research.

Opioid prescribing and dispensing: Experiences and perspectives from a survey of community pharmacists practising in the province of Quebec

Background

Canada leads in opioid prescription and consumption rates, and this has resulted in high levels of opioid-related morbidity and mortality. Pharmacists' input could contribute significantly to understanding the disadvantages of opioid prescribing and dispensing and improving the service. This study aimed to examine the experiences of community pharmacists in relation to opioid prescribing and dispensing, with a focus on optimizing collaboration and communication.

Methods

An online survey was performed among pharmacists from the province of Quebec, Canada, in 2016. Pharmacists were eligible if registered and working in community pharmacies.

Results

In all, 542 questionnaires were analyzed (participation rate of 8.1%). Pharmacotherapy-related problems were reported in at least 50% of opioid prescriptions: additional drug(s) required (reported by 30% of pharmacists), interaction(s) between opioid(s) and other drug(s) (16%), physician did not meet the general issuing standards for opioid prescriptions (26%) and patient had mild to moderate pain that was easily managed by a nonopioid analgesic (20%). Half of the patients were reported as requesting anticipated refills, possibly indicating abuse or poor pain control. Most pharmacists (89.6%) reported needing to contact physicians in 1 to 3 out of 10 opioid prescriptions, but many pharmacists (71.8%, often or very often) reported difficulties communicating with physicians.

Conclusions

Pharmacists' observations of pharmacotherapy-related problems and patients' unusual behaviours reveal a significant number of issues related to opioid prescribing and dispensing in an outpatient setting. Improved collaboration between physicians and pharmacists appears mandatory to address the issues reported in this study.