Prescribing errors in general practice

Prescribing errors are relatively common in general practice. Jennifer McCutcheon provides an overview of common prescribing errors and how they can be prevented Nurses, pharmacists and allied health professionals are increasingly becoming prescribers and many of them work autonomously in general practice. Prescribing professionals have a duty to understand what a prescribing error is, common examples of errors in practice, how they are prevented and how they can be investigated and reported should they occur.

Prevalence, contributory factors and severity of medication errors associated with direct-acting oral anticoagulants in adult patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose This study aimed to estimate the prevalence, contributory factors, and severity of medication errors associated with direct acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs). Methods A systematic review and meta-analysis were undertaken by searching 11 databases including Medline, Embase, and CINHAL between January 2008 and September 2020. The pooled prevalence of errors and predictive intervals were estimated using random-effects models using Stata software. Data related to error causation were synthesised according to Reason’s accident causation model. Results From the 5205 titles screened, 32 studies were included which were mostly based in hospitals and included DOAC treatment for thromboembolism and atrial fibrillation. The proportion of study population who experienced either prescription, administration, or dispensing error ranged from 5.3 to 37.3%. The pooled percentage of patients experiencing prescribing error was 20% (95% CI 15–25%; I2 = 96%; 95% PrI 4–43%). Prescribing error constituted the majority of all error types with a pooled estimate of 78% (95%CI 73–82%; I2 = 0) of all errors. The common reported causes were active failures including wrong drug, and dose for the indication. Mistakes such as non-consideration of renal function, and error-provoking conditions such as lack of knowledge were common contributing factors. Adverse events such as potentially fatal intracranial haemorrhage or patient deaths were linked to the errors but causality assessments were often missing. Conclusions Despite their favourable safety profile, DOAC medication errors are common. There is a need to promote multidisciplinary working, guideline-adherence, training, and education of healthcare professionals, and the use of theory-based and technology-facilitated interventions to minimise errors and maximise the benefits of DOACs usage in all settings. Protocol A protocol developed as per PRISMA-P guideline is registered under PROSPERO ID = CRD42019122996

Medication Errors in Secondary Care Hospitals in Kuwait: The Perspectives of Healthcare Professionals

Objectives: Medication errors (MEs) are the most common cause of adverse drug events (ADEs) and one of the most encountered patient safety issues in clinical settings. This study aimed to determine the types of MEs in secondary care hospitals in Kuwait and identify their causes. Also, it sought to determine the existing system of error reporting in Kuwait and identify reporting barriers from the perspectives of healthcare professionals (HCPs).Material and Methods: A descriptive cross-sectional study was conducted using a pre-tested self-administered questionnaire. Full-time physicians, pharmacists, and nurses (aged 21 years and older) working in secondary care governmental hospitals in Kuwait were considered eligible to participate in the study. Descriptive statistics and the Statistical Package for Social Science Software (SPSS), version 27 were used to analyze the data.Results: A total of 215 HCPs were approached and asked to take part in the study, of which 208 agreed, giving a response rate of 96.7%. Most HCPs (n = 129, 62.0%) reported that the most common type of ME is “prescribing error,” followed by “compliance error” (n = 83; 39.9%). Most HCPs thought that a high workload and lack of enough breaks (n = 128; 61.5%) were the most common causes of MEs, followed by miscommunication, either among medical staff or between staff and patients, which scored (n = 89; 42.8%) and (n = 82; 39.4%), respectively. In the past 12 months, 77.4% (n = 161) of HCPs reported that they did not fill out any ME incident reports. The lack of feedback (n = 65; 31.3%), as well as the length and complexity of the existing incident reporting forms (n = 63; 30.3%), were the major barriers against reporting any identified MEs.Conclusions: MEs are common in secondary care hospitals in Kuwait and can be found at many stages of practice. HCPs suggested many strategies to help reduce MEs, including proper communication between HCPs; double-checking every step of the process before administering medications to patients; providing training to keep HCPs up to date on any new treatment guidelines, and computerizing the health system.

Antimicrobial prescribing and outcomes of community-acquired pneumonia in Australian hospitalized patients: a cross-sectional study

Objective We aimed to assess prescribing practices, compliance with guidelines, and outcomes for patients who were admitted to the authors’ institution with community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Methods We performed a single-center retrospective cross-sectional study of adults with CAP presenting during the 2019 influenza season. CAP severity was assessed using the CURB-65 risk score. The effect of CURB-65 risk score use on the rate of appropriate antimicrobial prescribing was assessed using the chi-square test and reported as odds ratio (OR). Fisher’s exact test was used to assess the relationship between prescribing appropriateness and patient outcomes. Results Patients with low-risk CAP were most likely to be inappropriately prescribed antimicrobials (OR: 4.77; 95% confidence interval: 2.44–10.47). In low-risk CAP, the most common prescribing error was overuse of ceftriaxone. In high-risk CAP, the most common errors were ceftriaxone underdosing and missed atypical coverage with azithromycin. Overall, 80% of patients were considered to have been inappropriately prescribed antimicrobials. No effect on mortality was observed. Conclusions In this study, we found low use of CAP risk scores and low adherence to antimicrobial prescribing guidelines for CAP at the authors’ institution.

168. Syndrome-Based Analysis of Oral Antimicrobial Stewardship Opportunities at Hospital Discharge

Background Suboptimal oral antibiotic prescriptions (OAPs) are prevalent at discharge and contribute to treatment failure, resistance, toxicity, and excess costs. Syndrome-specific prescribing patterns have not been widely described at discharge, nor have specific reasons for excessive treatment durations (the most commonly cited prescribing error). Methods Retrospective cohort of patients discharged from a general medicine service at an academic hospital with ≥1 OAP for urinary tract infection (UTI), skin and soft tissue infection (SSTI), or lower respiratory tract infection (LRTI). Study period varied to include a random sample of encounters occurring after the most recent institutional guideline update for each syndrome. Exclusions: multiple infectious indications, discharge against medical advice, parenteral antibiotics at discharge, pregnancy, cystic fibrosis, and immunocompromising conditions. Discharge OAPs were assessed for suboptimal selection, dose, frequency, or duration according to institutional guidelines (with secondary adjudication). Results Analysis included 160 encounters: 70 UTIs, 66 SSTIs, and 24 LRTIs. Of 71 (44%) culture-positive infections, Enterobacterales (61%) and Streptococcus spp. (15%) were most often identified. In total, 180 OAPs were issued – most commonly cefpodoxime (21%), cefadroxil (18%), and doxycycline (17%). Overall, 99 (62%) encounters were associated with a suboptimal discharge OAP. Of 138 suboptimal characteristics identified, suboptimal duration was most frequent (57%), specifically excessive duration (45%). Proportion of suboptimal OAPs and their underlying reasons are analyzed by syndrome in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. Miscalculation (39%), intentional selection of guideline-discordant duration (29%), and omission of inpatient antibiotic days (19%) were the most frequent reasons for suboptimal duration (Fig. 3). Conclusion Suboptimal discharge OAPs were common for all studied syndromes, most notably SSTI. Excessive duration was a key driver, with reasons for inappropriate duration previously undescribed. Duration miscalculation and selection of appropriate treatment duration are key areas to focus electronic health record enhancements, provider education, and antimicrobial stewardship efforts. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures

An e-Delphi study to obtain expert consensus on the level of risk associated with preventable e-prescribing events.

Objectives We aim to seek expert opinion and gain consensus on the risks associated with a range of prescribing scenarios, preventable using e-prescribing systems, to inform the development of a simulation tool to evaluate the risk and safety of e-prescribing systems (ePRaSE). Methods We conducted a two-round eDelphi survey where expert participants were asked to score pre-designed prescribing scenarios using a five-point Likert scale to ascertain the likelihood of occurrence of the prescribing event, likelihood of occurrence of harm and the severity of the harm. Results Twenty four experts consented to participate with fifteen participants and thirteen participants completing rounds 1 and 2 respectively. Experts agreed on the level of risk associated with 136 out of 178 clinical scenarios with 131 scenarios categorised as high or extreme risk. Discussion We identified 131 extreme or high-risk prescribing scenarios that may be prevented using e-prescribing clinical decision support. The prescribing scenarios represent a variety of categories, with drug-disease contraindications, being the most frequent representing 37 (27%) scenarios and antimicrobial agents being the most common drug class representing 28 (21%) of the scenarios. Conclusion Our eDelphi study has achieved expert consensus on the risk associated with a range of clinical scenarios with most of the scenarios categorised as extreme or high risk. These prescribing scenarios represent the breadth of preventable prescribing error categories involving both basic and advanced clinical decision support. We will use the findings of this study to inform the development of the e-prescribing risk and safety evaluation tool.

Trainee doctor clinics after 24-hour shifts: Effects on patient satisfaction and prescription errors

Introduction: Sleep deprivation impacts clinical performance. However, literature is conflicting, with insufficient focus on patient outcomes. The aim of this study was to assess if patient satisfaction and prescription errors in outpatient clinics were adversely affected when consulting post-call versus non-post-call registrars. Methods: This prospective, quantitative study was set in a large teaching hospital in Singapore. Between November 2015 and February 2016, patients from clinics run by a registrar after 24-hour shift were recruited to post-call group. Patients from non-post-call clinics run by the same registrar were controls. Outcome measures were patient satisfaction, using 5-item 4-point Likert scale questionnaire, and prescribing error rate, defined as number of errors over number of orders. Differences were analysed using chi-squared test. Results: 103 of 106 (97%) patients in 9 post-call clinics and 93 of 105 (90%) patients in 9 non-post-call clinics were recruited. Questionnaire completion rate was 99%. 536 and 526 prescriptions were ordered in post-call and non-post-call groups, respectively. Percentage of top-box responses (greatest satisfaction) was higher in post-call group overall (79.3% versus 62.4%, p<0.001), and for each questionnaire item. There was no significant difference in prescribing errors (1.31% versus 2.28%, p=0.23). Conclusion: Patient satisfaction and prescribing error rates in outpatient clinics were not detrimentally affected. This provides some objective evidence that patients may safely consult post-call registrars. True impacts of sleep deprivation remain poorly understood, and larger, longer term, multicentre studies would inform generalisability. Qualitative studies of fatigue may shed light on complex interactions of emotions that compensate for tiredness.

Implementation and evaluation of a good prescribing tip email to reduce junior doctors' prescribing errors

Background Prescribing errors are common, occurring in 7% of in-patient medication orders in UK hospitals. Foundation Year 1 (F1) doctors have reported a lack of feedback on prescribing as a cause of errors. Aim To evaluate the effect of implementing a shared learning intervention to Foundation Year 1 doctors on their prescribing errors. Methods A shared learning intervention, ‘good prescribing tip’ emails, were designed and sent fortnightly to F1s to share feedback about common/serious prescribing errors occurring in the hospital. Ward pharmacists identified prescribing errors in newly prescribed in-patient and discharge medication orders for 2 weeks pre- and post-intervention during Winter/Spring 2017. The prevalence of prescribing errors was compared pre- and post-intervention using statistical analysis. Results Overall, there was a statistically significant reduction ( p < 0.05) in the prescribing error rate between pre-intervention (441 errors in 6190 prescriptions, 7.1%) and post-intervention (245 errors in 4866 prescriptions, 5.0%). When data were analysed by ward type there was a statistically significant reduction in the prescribing error rate on medical wards (6.8% to 4.5%) and on surgical wards (8.4% to 6.2%). Conclusions It is possible to design and implement a shared learning intervention, the ‘good prescribing tip’ email. Findings suggest that this intervention contributed to a reduction in the prevalence of prescribing errors across all wards, thereby improving patient safety.

Assessment of an electronic patient record system on discharge prescribing errors in a Tertiary University Hospital

Background Prescribing error represent a significant source of preventable harm to patients. Prescribing errors at discharge, including omission of pre-admission medications (PAM), are particularly harmful as they frequently propagate following discharge. This study assesses the impact of an educational intervention and introduction of an electronic patient record (EPR) in the same centre on omission of PAM at discharge using a pragmatic design. A survey of newly qualified doctors is used to contextualise findings. Methods Discharge prescriptions and discharge summaries were reviewed at discharge, and compared to admission medicine lists, using a paper-based chart system. Discrepancies were noted, using Health Information and Quality Authority guidelines for discharge prescribing. An educational intervention was conducted. Further review of discharge prescriptions and discharge summaries took place. Following introduction of an EPR, review of discharge summaries and discharge prescriptions was repeated. A survey was administered to recently qualified doctors (interns), and analysed using descriptive statistics and thematic analysis. Results Omission of PAM as prescribed or discontinued items at discharge occurs frequently. An educational intervention did not significantly change prescribing error rates (U = 1255.5, p = 0.206). EPR introduction did significantly reduce omission of PAM on discharge prescribing (U = 694, p < 0.001), however there was also a reduction in the rate of deliberate discontinuation of PAM at discharge (U = 1237.5, p = 0.007). Survey results demonstrated that multiple sources are required to develop a discharge prescription. Time pressure, access to documentation and lack of admission medicine reconciliation are frequently cited causes of discharge prescribing error. Conclusion This study verified passive educational interventions alone do not improve discharge prescribing. Introduction of EPR improved discharge prescribing, but negatively impacted deliberate discontinuation of PAM at discharge. This is attributable to reduced access to key sources of information used in formulating discharge prescriptions, and separation of the discontinuation function from the prescribing function on the EPR discharge application.