Delineating patient errors in an intracavernosal injection program.

BACKGROUND: Intracavernosal injection therapy (ICI) is a well-established therapeutic strategy for men with erectile dysfunction. Complications are often related to patient error when performong ICI. AIM: The objective of this study was to examine patient errors in an established patient training program for performing ICI and identify factors that could predict major errors. METHODS: Patients enrolled in our ICI program are trained on technical aspects, and dose titration is begun. Patients are given explicit instructions during training, both verbally and in written form. Records were reviewed for men using ICI for ≥6 months. Multivariable analysis was used to define predictors of major errors. OUTCOMES: Errors were listed as minor (zero-response injection, penile bruising, expired medication) and major (errors potentially leading to priapism: dose self-titration, double injecting). RESULTS: Overall, 1368 patients met the inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. The mean patient age was 66 ± 22 (range 29-91) years. Regarding education, 41% of patients had graduate-level education, 48% had college education, and 11% high school education. Mean follow-up was 3.2 ± 7.6 (range 0.5-12) years. The agents used were trimix (62%), bimix (35%), papaverine (2%), and prostaglandin E1 monotherapy (1%). At least 1 error occurred during self-administration in 42% of patients during their time in the program. Errors included zero response to medication due to technical error (8% of patients), penile bruising (34%), use of an expired bottle (18%), self-titration (5%), and double injecting (4% of patients); 12% of men committed ≥1 error during their time in the program. On multivariable analysis, independent predictors of the occurrence of a major error included: young age, graduate-level education, and <12 months of injection use. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: To the best of our knowledge, this is the first reported study to investigate ICI errors and risk factors. The identification of factors predictive of major errors allows for more tailored and intensive training in this subset of patients. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: Strengths of this study include a large patient population (1386 men) with a considerable follow-up time. Additionally, the rigorous training, education, and monitoring of the participants, as well as the use of formal definitions, enhances the accuracy and reliability of the results. Despite the strengths of the study, recall bias may be a limitation concern. CONCLUSION: The majority of patients were error free, and the majority of the errors were minor in nature. Major errors occurred in <10% of patients. Younger age, graduate-level education, and less experience with ICI were independent predictors of major errors.

Developing a process to measure actual harm from medication errors in paediatric inpatients: From design to implementation.

AIMS: The potential harm associated with medication errors is widely reported, but data on actual harm are limited. When actual harm has been measured, assessment processes are often poorly described, limiting their ability to be reproduced by other studies. Our aim was to design and implement a new process to assess actual harm resulting from medication errors in paediatric inpatient care. METHODS: Prescribing errors were identified through retrospective medical record reviews (n = 26 369 orders) and medication administration errors through direct observation (n = 5137 administrations) in a tertiary paediatric hospital. All errors were assigned potential harm severity ratings on a 5-point scale. Multidisciplinary panels reviewed case studies for patients assigned the highest three potential severity ratings and determined the following: actual harm occurrence and severity level, plausibility of a link between the error(s) and identified harm(s) and a confidence rating if no harm had occurred. RESULTS: Multidisciplinary harm panels (n = 28) reviewed 566 case studies (173 prescribing related and 393 administration related) and found evidence of actual harm in 89 (prescribing = 22, administration = 67). Eight cases of serious harm cases were found (prescribing = 1, administration = 7) and no cases of severe harm. The panels were very confident in 65% of cases (n = 302) where no harm was found. Potential and actual harm ratings varied. CONCLUSIONS: This harm assessment process provides a systematic method for determining actual harm from medication errors. The multidisciplinary nature of the panels was critical in evaluating specific clinical, therapeutic and contextual considerations including care delivery pathways, therapeutic dose ranges and drug-drug and drug-disease interactions.

Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs: Safety assessment in a European Comprehensive Cancer Centre using the risk matrix approach.

AIMS: The purpose of this work was to assess failures in the advanced prescription of parenteral anticancer agents in an adult day oncology care unit with more than 100 patients per day. METHODS: An a priori descriptive analysis was carried out by using the risk matrix approach. After defining the scope in a multidisciplinary meeting, we determined at each step the failure modes (FMs), their effects (E) and their associated causes (C). A severity score (S) was assigned to all effects and a probability of occurrence (O) to all causes. These S and O indicators, were used to obtain a criticality index (CI) matrix. We assessed the risk control (RC) of each failure in order to define a residual criticality index (rCI) matrix. RESULTS: During risk analysis, 14 FMs were detected, and 61 scenarios were identified considering all possible effects and causes. Nine situations (15%) were highlighted with the maximum CI, 18 (30%) with a medium CI, and 34 (55%) with a negligible CI. Nevertheless, among all these critical situations, only three (5%) had an rCI to process (i.e., missed dose adjustment, multiple prescriptions and abnormal biology data); the others required monitoring only. Clinicians' and pharmacists' knowledge of these critical situations enables them to manage the associated risks. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs appears to be a safe practice for patients when combined with risk management. The major risks identified concerned missed dose adjustment, prescription duplication and lack of consideration for abnormal biology data.

Medication-related incidents in acute care hospitals among different age groups: An analysis of national patient safety report data.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to perform a nationwide analysis of medication errors (MEs) from hospitals using national reporting system data and to compare the ME patterns among different age groups. METHODS: We analyzed medication-related incidents in acute care hospitals reported to the Korean Patient Safety Reporting and Learning System (KOPS), which is a patient safety reporting system, from July 2016 to December 2020. The stages of the medication use process, type of errors, medication class involved in MEs, and degree of harm were analyzed. RESULTS: Among a total of 5071 medication-related incidents, 37.7% (1911 cases) were incidents that caused patient harm and 1.2% caused long-term, permanent, and fatal harm. The proportion of medication-related incidents that resulted in harm was the highest among the <1-year-old age group (67 cases, 51.5%), followed by the elderly (≥ 65 years) (828 cases, 40.9%). The cases leading to patient death were most frequently reported in patients aged ≥65 years. Medication-related incidents occurred mainly in the administration stage (2954 cases, 58.3%), and wrong dose was the most frequently reported ME type. The most prevalent medication class occurring in the 20-64-year age group (256 cases, 11.7%) was 'antibacterials for systemic use', whereas 'contrast media' (236 cases, 11.6%) and 'blood substitutes and perfusion solutions' (98 cases, 19.3%) were the most prevalent drug classes in the ≥65- and <20-year-old age groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: It is necessary to establish guidelines for the prevention of medication-related incidents according to the medication use process and patient age group.

Medication error rates in Iranian hospitals: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Medication errors (MEs) in hospitals decrease patient satisfaction, increase hospital mortality, lower hospital productivity, and increase in the costs of the health system. This study was conducted to determine the rate of MEs in Iranian hospitals. METHOD: In this meta-analysis, all published articles on ME rates in Iranian hospitals were identified from five databases and Google Scholar and assessed for quality. The heterogeneity of the studies was examined using the I2 index and a meta-regression model was used to evaluate the variables suspected of heterogeneity at the 0.05 significance level. Finally, 17 articles were eligible to be included in this study and were analyzed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis (CMA) software. FINDINGS: Based on the estimation of the random-effects model, the ME rate in Iranian hospitals was 10.9% (5.1%-21.7%; 95% CI). The highest rate was observed in Sanandaj in 2006 at 99.5% (92.6%-100.0%; 95% CI) and the lowest rate was observed in Kashan in 2019 at 0.2% (0.1%-0.3%; 95% CI). In addition, sample size and publication year were significantly correlated with ME rate (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: According to the results of this study; ME rate in Iran is relatvively high based on the synthesis of the research conducted in Iranian hospitals. In addition to being costly, MEs have negative consequences for patients. Thereofore, it is necessary to emphasize the voluntary nature of medication error reporting in health sytem of Iran.

Medication errors in veterinary anesthesia: a literature review.

OBJECTIVE: To provide an overview of medication errors (MEs) in veterinary medicine, with a focus on the perianesthetic period; to compare MEs in veterinary medicine with human anesthesia practice, and to describe factors contributing to the risk of MEs and strategies for error reduction. DATABASES USED: PubMed and CAB abstracts; search terms: [("patient safety" or "medication error∗") AND veterin∗]. CONCLUSIONS: Human anesthesia is recognized as having a relatively high risk of MEs. In veterinary medicine, MEs were among the most commonly reported medical error. Predisposing factors for MEs in human and veterinary anesthesia include general (e.g. distraction, fatigue, workload, supervision) and specific factors (e.g. requirement for dose calculations when dosing for body mass, using several medications within a short time period and preparing syringes ahead of time). Data on MEs are most commonly collected in self-reporting systems, which very likely underestimate the true incidence, a problem acknowledged in human medicine. Case reports have described a variety of MEs in the perianesthetic period, including prescription, preparation and administration errors. Dogs and cats were the most frequently reported species, with MEs in cats more commonly associated with harmful outcomes compared with dogs. In addition to education and raising awareness, other strategies described for reducing the risk of MEs include behavioral, communication, identification, organizational, engineering and cognitive aids.

Hospitalizations and deaths related to adverse drug events worldwide: Systematic review of studies with national coverage.

PURPOSE: Adverse drug events are related to negative outcomes in healthcare, including hospitalization, increased duration of hospital stay and death. The aim of this study was to conduct a systematic review to evaluate hospitalizations and deaths related to adverse drug events worldwide, reported in studies with national coverage. METHODS: The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42020157008). We performed a systematic search on Medline, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, and the Cochrane Library (until March 2020) using pre-specified terms. We included published studies that reported data on hospitalizations and/or deaths related to adverse drug events from a national perspective and the use of secondary data as a source of information. Two reviewers independently extracted and synthesized data. The quality of the studies was assessed using an adapted version of the Joanna Briggs Institute critical appraisal checklist for prevalence studies. Narrative summaries of findings were undertaken. RESULTS: Among 59,336 citations, 62 studies were included for data extraction and synthesis. Among these studies, 41 studies included the outcome of hospitalization, 16 included the death outcome, and five included both outcomes. Administrative databases regarding discharges and registries of vital statistics were the most common sources of information. The relative frequency of hospitalizations ranged from 0.03% to 7.3%, and from 9.7 to 383.0/100,000 population, whereas mortality rate ranged from 0.1 to 7.88/100,000 population. CONCLUSION: Our study highlights information about adverse drug events using large administrative databases in a national scenario and provides an overview of databases and methods implemented to detect adverse drug events.

Medication-related adverse events in health care-what have we learned? A narrative overview of the current knowledge.

PURPOSE: Although medication-related adverse events (MRAEs) in health care are vastly studied, high heterogeneity in study results complicates the interpretations of the current situation. The main objective of this study was to form an up-to-date overview of the current knowledge of the prevalence, risk factors, and surveillance of MRAEs in health care. METHODS: Electronic databases (PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Scopus) were searched with applicable search terms to collect information on medication-related adverse events. In order to obtain an up-to-date view of MRAEs, only studies published after 2000 were accepted. RESULTS: The prevalence rates of different MRAEs vary greatly between individual studies and meta-analyses. Study setting, patient population, and detection methods play an important role in determining detection rates, which should be regarded while interpreting the results. Medication-related adverse events are more common in elderly patients and patients with lowered liver or kidney function, polypharmacy, and a large number of additional comorbidities. However, the risk of MRAEs is also significantly increased by the use of high-risk medicines but also in certain care situations. Preventing MRAEs is important as it will decrease patient mortality and morbidity but also reduce costs and functional challenges related to them. CONCLUSIONS: Medication-related adverse events are highly common and have both immediate and long-term effects to patients and healthcare systems worldwide. Conclusive solutions for prevention of all medication-related harm are impossible to create. In the future, however, the development of efficient real-time detection methods can provide significant improvements for event prevention and forecasting.

Occurrence and types of medication error and its associated factors in a reference teaching hospital in northeastern Iran: a retrospective study of medical records.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are categorized among the most common medical errors that may lead to irreparable damages to patients and impose huge costs on the health system. A correct understanding of the prevalence of medication errors and the factors affecting their occurrence is indispensable to prevent such errors. The purpose of this study was to investigate the prevalence and types of medication errors among nurses in a hospital in northeastern Iran. METHODS: The present descriptive-analytical research was conducted on 147 medical records of patients admitted to the Department of Internal Medicine at a hospital in northeastern Iran in 2019, selected by systematic sampling. The data were collected through a researcher-made checklist containing the demographic profiles of the nurses, the number of doctor's orders, the number of medication errors and the type of medication error, and were finally analyzed using STATA version 11 software at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: Based on the findings of this study, the mean prevalence of medication error per each medical case was 2.42. Giving non-prescription medicine (47.8%) was the highest and using the wrong form of the drug (3.9%) was the lowest medication error. In addition, there was no statistically significant relationship between medication error and the age, gender and marital status of nurses (p > 0.05), while the prevalence of medication error in corporate nurses was 1.76 times higher than that of nurses with permanent employment status (IRR = 1.76, p = 0.009). The prevalence of medication error in the morning shift (IRR = 0.65, p = 0.001) and evening shift (IRR = 0.69, p = 0.011) was significantly lower than that in the night shift. CONCLUSION: Estimating the prevalence and types of medication errors and identified risk factors allows for more targeted interventions. According to the findings of the study, training nurses, adopting an evidence-based care approach and creating interaction and coordination between nurses and pharmacists in the hospital can play an effective role in reducing the medication error of nurses. However, further research is needed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions to reduce the prevalence of medication errors.

Medication Errors in Surgery: A Classification Taxonomy and a Pilot Study in Postcall Residents.

INTRODUCTION: The post-call state in postgraduate medical trainees is associated with impaired decision-making and increased medical errors. An association between post-call state and medication prescription errors for surgery residents is yet to be established. Our objective was to determine whether post-call state is associated with increased proportion of medication prescription errors committed by surgery residents in an academic hospital without a computerized physician order entry (CPOE) system. METHODS: This prospective observational study was conducted at a tertiary academic hospital between June 28 and August 31, 2017. It compared the proportion of medication prescription errors committed by surgery residents in their post-call (PC) and no-call (NC) states. A novel taxonomy was developed to classify medication prescription errors. RESULTS: Sixteen of twenty-one eligible residents (76%) participated in this study. Self-reported hours of sleep per night was significantly higher in the NC group compared to the PC group (6(4-8) vs 2(0-4) hours, P < 0.01). PC residents committed a significantly higher proportion of medication prescription errors versus NC residents (9.2% vs 3.2%; p=0.04). Decision-making and prescription-writing errors comprised 33% and 67% of errors, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The post-call state in surgery residents is associated with a significantly higher proportion of medication prescription errors in a hospital without a CPOE system. Decision-making and prescription-writing errors could potentially be addressed by additional educational interventions.

Comparison of Dosing Schemes for Thyroid Hormone Replacement Therapy After Thyroidectomy.

BACKGROUND: Current thyroid hormone replacement therapy (THRT) is built on weight-based standard calculation of dose. A novel Poisson regression model, which accounts for seven clinical variables, was recently proposed to improve accuracy of THRT. We aimed to compare the accuracy of estimated THRT dose to reach euthyroid and the difference in predicted dose between the Poisson (scheme A) and the weight-based standard (scheme B) in patients following total thyroidectomy for benign disease. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed medical record of patients who underwent total or completion thyroidectomy for benign disease at a single institution between 2011 and 2019. The THRT dose was calculated using both schemes. We compared the difference between calculated THRT and prediction rates for optimal THRT dosing needed to achieve a euthyroid state between dosing schemes. Patients were evaluated for achieving euthyroid state, defined as TSH 0.45-4.5 mIU/L. We also compared dosing error rates (> 25 mcg over- and underdosing) between schemes. Prediction rates were compared by BMI tertiles to account for the effect of BMI extremes in achieving euthyroid state. The difference in predicted dose between schemes was calculated in both the total sample size and patients that met euthyroid. A measure of agreement, Kappa, was used to estimate agreement between dosing schemes. RESULTS: A total of 406 patients underwent total thyroidectomy for benign disease, with 184 having sufficient follow up data confirming euthyroid state. Of the 184 patients, 85.9% (n = 158) were women, 81% (n = 149) were Hispanic, and 56.5% (n = 104) were obese with a median BMI of 30.8 kg/m2. Scheme A resulted in a higher, but not statistically significant, accuracy rate (A: 60.3%, n = 111 versus B: 53.8%, n = 99; P = 0.21). Overdosing errors were lower with Scheme A (A:17.9% versus B: 32.1%; P = 0.0025) and less extreme > 25 µg (A: 17.9% versus B: 26.1%; P = 0.08). A trend in improved accuracy in patients with a BMI > 35 kg/m2 was noted (A: 46.9% versus B: 34.4%; P = 0.20). Scheme A also resulted in less overdosing errors in obese patients compared to Scheme B (A: 19.2% versus 45.2%; P = 0.0006). The average difference in predicted dose between schemes was an entire dose difference, mean of 16.0 µg and 15.8 µg for the total and euthyroid samples respectively. Furthermore, for the majority of patients the predicted dose did not match between the two dosing schemes for total and euthyroid samples, 76% (n = 311) and 76% (n = 141) respectively. In patients that achieved euthyroid, agreement between dosing schemes was low to moderate (Kappa = 0.360). CONCLUSIONS: Lower rates of overdosing were found for scheme A, particularly with obese patients. No statistically significant differences in predicted THRT dose was observed between schemes. The difference in predicted dose between schemes was on average 15 ug, correlating with an entire dose. The consideration of clinical variables other than weight (scheme A) when determining optimal THRT dosing may be of importance to prevent overdoses, with particular clinical relevance in patients with higher BMIs.

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.

The Queensland Inpatient Diabetes Survey (QuIDS) 2019: the bedside audit of practice.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the quality of care for patients with diabetes in Queensland hospitals, including blood glucose control, rates of hospital-acquired harm, the incidence of insulin prescription and management errors, and appropriate foot and peri-operative care. DESIGN, SETTING: Cross-sectional audit of 27 public hospitals in Queensland: four of five tertiary/quaternary referral centres, four of seven large regional or outer metropolitan hospitals, seven of 13 smaller outer metropolitan or small regional hospitals, and 12 of 88 hospitals in rural or remote locations. PARTICIPANTS: 850 adult inpatients with diabetes mellitus in medical, surgical, mental health, high dependency, or intensive care wards. RESULTS: Twenty-seven of 115 public hospitals that admit acute inpatients participated in the audit, including 4175 of 6652 eligible acute hospital beds in Queensland. A total of 1003 patients had diabetes (24%), and data were collected for 850 (85%). Their mean age was 65.9 years (SD, 15.1 years), 357 were women (42%), and their mean HbA1c level was 66 mmol/mol (SD, 26 mmol/mol). Rates of good diabetes days (appropriate monitoring, no more than one blood glucose measurement greater than 10 mmol/L, and none below 5 mmol/L) were low in patients with type 1 diabetes (22.1 per 100 patient-days) or type 2 diabetes treated with insulin (40.1 per 100 patient-days); hypoglycaemia rates were high for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (24.1 episodes per 100 patient-days). One or more medication errors were identified for 201 patients (32%), including insulin prescribing errors for 127 patients (39%). Four patients with type 1 diabetes experienced diabetic ketoacidosis in hospital (8%); 121 patients (14%) met the criteria for review by a specialist diabetes team but were not reviewed by any diabetes specialist (medical, nursing, allied health). CONCLUSIONS: We identified several deficits in inpatient diabetes management in Queensland, including high rates of medication error and hospital-acquired harm and low rates of appropriate glycaemic control, particularly for patients treated with insulin. These deficits require attention, and ongoing evaluation of outcomes is necessary.

Construction and analysis of a database for medication errors in a pharmacovigilance centre-the Moroccan experience.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to describe the epidemiological profile of medication errors (MEs) reported to the Moroccan Pharmacovigilance Center (MPVC), to determine factors associated with serious MEs, and to describe signals related to them. METHODS: We carried out a retrospective descriptive analysis of MEs reported to the MPVC from 2006 to 2016 and a secondary analysis of the seriousness of MEs with adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The reports were sorted by demographic profile and by ME and ADR characteristics. For signal detection, a quantitative approach was adopted, and the root cause analysis was completed. Epi info 7 software was used to perform descriptive and analytical statistics. The statistical significance level was set at p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 1618 ME reports were retrieved. The proportion of MEs associated with serious ADRs was 23.9%. The factors statistically associated with serious MEs were as follows: (i) the age group 16 years old and less (p < 0.001), (ii) the gender (p = 0.01), (iii) the administration and the prescription stages (p < 0.001), and (iv) the ME types related to inappropriate schedule of drug administration, drug prescribing error (p < 0.001), and incorrect drug administration dosage form (p = 0.04). Fourteen signals related to MEs were detected, for which risk minimization actions were implemented. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a ME unit within the MPVC was an opportunity to further improve the pharmacovigilance centre performance and consequently its contribution to medication safety. The lessons learned from MEs should be shared through pharmacovigilance networks and with institutions involved in medication safety for synergistic results to achieve patient safety worldwide.

A descriptive evaluation of resident prescription writing errors and self-perceived learning needs in dermatology.

Prescribing errors in medical practice are common, and may be preventable in a significant proportion of cases. The literature on dermatological prescription errors is scarce. We sought to determine the rate and causes of resident prescribing errors in an outpatient dermatology practice, and surveyed residents' self-perceived prescription writing learning needs. All prescription errors were tabulated at the Ricky Kanee Schachter Dermatology Clinic (Women's College Hospital) from November 2019 to January 2020. There was an overall prescribing error rate of 1.58% (23/1457), with no significant difference between topical and systemic drugs (1.85% and 0.86%, respectively; P = 0.20) or between written prescriptions and those created by the electronic medical record (1.66% and 1.29%, respectively; P = 0.84). The survey response rate was 26.2% (22/82), with respondents reporting their overall confidence in dermatology prescription writing as (mean ± SD) 7.14 ± 1.75 out of 10. While the resident prescribing error rate was relatively low, multiple errors were avoidable, and residents agree that targeted dermatology-specific training in prescription writing is needed.

Incidence of prescription errors in patients discharged from the emergency department.

PURPOSE: The Emergency Department (ED) is known for its high rates of medication errors secondary to many characteristics such as unfamiliar patients, lack of continuity of care, increasing patient volumes, reliance on verbal orders, and fewer safety mechanisms. The purpose of this study was to quantify and characterize the medication errors that occur in patients discharged from the ED. METHODS: Prescriptions for patients discharged from the adult ED at an academic medical center from 2015 to 2018 were reviewed. Errors in discharge medication orders were documented as well as characteristics of these errors including medication class, errors in prescription directions, quantity prescribed, and refills given inappropriately. RESULTS: A total of 115,933 prescriptions were reviewed and a total of 20,498 errors were identified within 19,126 prescriptions. Of the errors identified, 4048 (19.7%) involved prescription directions, 6537 (31.9%) were errors in quantity prescribed, and 9913 (48.4%) were prescriptions written with refills. The proportion of errors among different prescriber statuses was significantly different when comparing all prescribers (p < .001). Prescriptions written by Non-Emergency Medicine residents had significantly more errors in quantity and refills (p < .001, p < .001), and prescriptions written by Emergency Medicine residents had significantly more errors in directions (p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: This review identified a 16.5% error rate among all prescriptions provided to patients upon ED discharge that varied among different subcategories of medications. This is consistent with the limited literature that is currently available on the topic. These results could assist institutions in developing targeted mitigation strategies to limit medication misadventures in patients discharged from the ED.

Identifying errors and safety considerations in patients undergoing thrombolysis for acute ischemic stroke.

BACKGROUND & PURPOSE: Alteplase is the standard of care for early pharmacologic thrombolysis after acute ischemic stroke (AIS). Alteplase is also considered a high-alert medication and is fraught with potential for error. We sought to describe the difference in medication error rates in in patients receiving alteplase for acute ischemic stroke from regional hospitals compared to patients receiving alteplase at the Comprehensive Stroke Center. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort comparison of patients who were greater than 18 years old that received intravenous alteplase for the treatment of AIS from June 2015 to June 2018. Several institution specific databases were utilized to obtain pertinent data. A standardized taxonomy was utilized to classify medication errors. Patients were excluded if they received any fibrinolytic other than alteplase or if alteplase was used for a non-stroke indication. Two cohorts (from regional hospitals or the Comprehensive Stroke Center (CSC)) were compared. RESULTS: A total of 676 patients received alteplase during the study period (34% from the CSC and 66% from regional hospitals). There were 133 (19.8%) errors identified. Ten errors (1.6%) occurred at the CSC and 123 (18.2%) errors occurred at regional hospitals. More patients who had an error with alteplase administration (12.7%) experienced a hemorrhagic conversion compared to those with no error in administration (7.2%, p= 0.04). CONCLUSION: The error rate of alteplase infusion for ischemic stroke is high, particularly in patients from referring centers. Errors may be associated with adverse events. Further education and administration safeguards should be implemented to decrease the risk of medication errors.

Impact of clinical pharmacy services in a hematology/oncology ward in Morocco.

BACKGROUND: Clinical pharmacists are contributing to safe medication use by providing comprehensive management to patients and medical staff. The aim of this study is to document and evaluate the role of clinical pharmacy services in oncology department. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A prospective, descriptive, observational study was carried out from July 2018 through June 2019 at the Department of Medical Oncology at the National Institute of Oncology, Morocco. Medication reviews concerning hospitalized adult cancer patients were performed every day by the clinical pharmacist assigned to the department. RESULTS: A total of 3542 prescriptions of 526 adult cancer patients were analyzed. The pharmacist identified 450 drug-related problems (12.7% of the prescriptions) primarily related to the analgesics (31.5%). Medication problems included mostly untreated indications (31.3%), overdosing (17.1%), drug-drug interactions (12.4%), underdosing (11.1%), administration omissions (6.7%), drug not indicated (6.0%), and contraindication (5.3%). Interventions (n = 450) led to drug additions (30.7%), drug dosing adjustments (27.1%), treatment discontinuations (20.0%), recall of the treatment (6.2%), replacement of a drug with another one (5.1%), administration optimization (4.0%), therapeutic drug monitoring (3.1%), alternate routes of administration (2.5%), and extension of treatment duration (1.3%). Most (98%) of the interventions were accepted and implemented by the medical staff-172 (38.2%) having a significant clinical impact on the patient, 88 (19.6%) as having a very significant clinical impact, and 71(15.8%) as having a potential vital impact. CONCLUSION: This work highlights the positive clinical relevance of pharmacists' interventions in oncology and the importance of medicopharmaceutical collaboration to prevent medication error.

Dosing errors in total parenteral nutrition prescriptions at a specialized cancer care hospital of Lahore: The role of clinical pharmacist.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of pharmacist in identifying the frequency of errors in total parenteral nutrition prescriptions in cancer patients for the years 2015 and 2016. Total parenteral nutrition has a high potential for medical errors because of its complex composition, thus leading to severe complications. Pharmacist review of the prescriptions reduces the risk of inappropriate prescribing, preparation, and administration of parenteral nutrition. METHODOLOGY: An observational study was performed by collecting data of total parenteral nutrition prescriptions of 71 patients for the last two years from Pharmacy Department of specialized cancer care hospital. RESULTS: It was found that the frequency of dosing errors and incomplete prescriptions was higher in 2015 compared to 2016. Additionally, the frequency of macro and micronutrients dosing errors were higher in adults (23.4% and 66.2%) compared to pediatrics (14.6% and 46.6%). Furthermore, the frequency of illegible prescriptions was higher (5.03%) in year 2016 as compared to year 2015 (1.64%). Nevertheless, such dose interventions improved patient's weight (20%) and promoted enteral feeding (42.3%). Major complication was hypophosphatemia (39.4%) followed by hyperglycemia (10%) and catheter-induced infection, i.e. sepsis (4.2%). CONCLUSION: In conclusion, data suggested that pharmacist played instrumental role in identifying and rectifying total parenteral nutrition dosing errors for both micronutrients and macronutrients-with higher frequency in 2015 compared to 2016, leading to improvements in total parenteral nutrition-related complications and switches to enteral feeding.

Clinical and economic impacts of explicit tools detecting prescribing errors: A systematic review.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Many explicit tools have been developed to reduce prescribing errors and ensure patients' safety. The impact of explicit tools is not well studied. The objective of this study was (a) to conduct a systematic review of systematic reviews listing explicit tools developed to detect prescribing errors and (b) to assess their impact on clinical and economic outcomes. METHODS: This project includes two related parts. First, a systematic review of systematic reviews listing explicit tools dedicated to geriatrics or internal medicine was performed to develop an exhaustive list of explicit tools. Then, using the list compiled in the first step, a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCT) assessing clinical or economic impacts of tools was performed to evaluate their usefulness. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: The systematic review of systematic reviews identified 49 explicit tools. The systematic review of RCT, using one or more of the 49 explicit tools, identified 5 RCT using explicit tools as intervention (3 STOPP/START and 2 FORTA RCT). The 5 studies evaluated clinical impacts with 3 RCT identifying significant clinical impacts (falls, activities of daily living and/or adverse drug reactions) and 2 STOPP/START RCT identifying significant economic impacts. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The systematic review of RCT showed that explicit tools can have some effect in improving patients' safety. Further studies are warranted to better characterize their clinical and economic impact.