Strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) of the electronic prescribing systems executed in Iran from the physician's viewpoint: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Electronic prescribing (e-prescribing) is an essential technology in the modern health system. This technology has made many changes in the prescription process, which have advantages and disadvantages and have created opportunities for transforming the health system. This study aimed to investigate the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats of the e-prescribing system implemented in Iran from the physician's viewpoint. METHODS: This phenomenological qualitative study was conducted in 2022. The participants were 15 Iranian specialist physicians working at Urmia University of Medical Sciences, selected purposively and deliberately. Data was collected through in-depth semi-structured interviews using an interview guide comprising 16 questions. Interviews were conducted until data saturation was reached. The audio data was transcribed into text and analyzed using the thematic analysis. To ensure the validity and reliability of the findings, the criteria introduced by Lincoln and Guba were employed. RESULTS: The results of this study showed that the e-prescribing system executed in Iran has diverse and multidimensional strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. In the strengths section, the analysis of the interviews led to the extraction of semantic units in the categories of prescription process, prescriber, patient, technical, economic, communication, and insurance. Also, the weaknesses in the three categories of the prescriber, patient, and technical were debatable. The opportunities extracted from the narratives of the interviewees were placed in four categories including technical, national macro policies, Ministry of Health macro-policies, and socio-cultural issues. Finally, the discussed threats are classified into two technical and macro policies of the Ministry of Health categories. On the other hand, technical issues played an effective role in all aspects of the SWOT model. CONCLUSION: The e-prescribing system in Iran has strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats. An overarching factor across all aspects of the SWOT model was technical infrastructure. A robust technical infrastructure is considered a strength and an opportunity for the growth of the electronic prescribing system in Iran. Conversely, any shortcomings in these systems are viewed as weaknesses and pose a threat to the system's sustainability.

Optimising ePrescribing in hospitals through the interoperability of systems and processes: a qualitative study in the UK, US, Norway and the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Investment in the implementation of hospital ePrescribing systems has been a priority in many economically-developed countries in order to modernise the delivery of healthcare. However, maximum gains in the safety, quality and efficiency of care are unlikely to be fully realised unless ePrescribing systems are further optimised in a local context. Typical barriers to optimal use are often encountered in relation to a lack of systemic capacity and preparedness to meet various levels of interoperability requirements, including at the data, systems and services levels. This lack of systemic interoperability may in turn limit the opportunities and benefits potentially arising from implementing novel digital heath systems. METHODS: We undertook n = 54 qualitative interviews with key stakeholders at nine digitally advanced hospital sites across the UK, US, Norway and the Netherlands. We included hospitals featuring 'standalone, best of breed' systems, which were interfaced locally, and multi-component and integrated electronic health record enterprise systems. We analysed the data inductively, looking at strategies and constraints for ePrescribing interoperability within and beyond hospital systems. RESULTS: Our thematic analysis identified 4 main drivers for increasing ePrescribing systems interoperability: (1) improving patient safety (2) improving integration & continuity of care (3) optimising care pathways and providing tailored decision support to meet local and contextualised care priorities and (4) to enable full patient care services interoperability in a variety of settings and contexts. These 4 interoperability dimensions were not always pursued equally at each implementation site, and these were often dependent on the specific national, policy, organisational or technical contexts of the ePrescribing implementations. Safety and efficiency objectives drove optimisation targeted at infrastructure and governance at all levels. Constraints to interoperability came from factors such as legacy systems, but barriers to interoperability of processes came from system capability, hospital policy and staff culture. CONCLUSIONS: Achieving interoperability is key in making ePrescribing systems both safe and useable. Data resources exist at macro, meso and micro levels, as do the governance interventions necessary to achieve system interoperability. Strategic objectives, most notably improved safety, often motivated hospitals to push for evolution across the entire data architecture of which they formed a part. However, hospitals negotiated this terrain with varying degrees of centralised coordination. Hospitals were heavily reliant on staff buy-in to ensure that systems interoperability was built upon to achieve effective data sharing and use. Positive outcomes were founded on a culture of agreement about the usefulness of access by stakeholders, including prescribers, policymakers, vendors and lab technicians, which was reflected in an alignment of governance goals with system design.

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.

Pharmacist-led, prescription intervention system-assisted feedback to reduce prescribing errors: A retrospective study.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Prescribing errors are prevalent in hospital settings, with provision of feedback recommended to support prescribing by doctors. To evaluate the impact of a pharmacist-led prescription intervention system on prescribing error rates and to measure intervention efficiency. METHODS: All prescribers in Shandong Provincial Third Hospital received feedback from ward pharmacists using a pharmacist-led prescription intervention system. The prescribing error rate was calculated from Oct 2019 to December 2020. After the intervention was applied, the rates of PASS 1 (System pass), PASS 2 (Pharmacist pass) and PASS 3 (Pharmacist-doctor pass) events and the feedback time were calculated each month. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Irrational use of drugs was reduced and the prescription rate increased significantly. The error rate reduced from 6.94% to 1.96%, representing an estimated 71.76% decrease overall (p < 0.05). The PASS 1 rate gradually increased from 88% to 96% (p < 0.05), the PASS 2 rate gradually decreased from 5.06% to 2.04% (p < 0.05), the PASS 3 rate gradually decreased from 6.94% to 1.96% (p < 0.05). WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The pharmacist-led prescription intervention system has the potential to reduce prescribing errors and improve prescribing outcomes and patient safety.

E-prescribing and access to prescription medicines during lockdown: experience of patients in Aotearoa/New Zealand.

BACKGROUND: Health services internationally have been compelled to change their methods of service delivery in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, to mitigate the spread of infection amongst health professionals and patients. In Aotearoa/New Zealand, widespread electronic delivery of prescriptions (e-prescribing) was enabled. The aim of the research was to explore patients' experiences of how lockdown, changes to prescribing and the interface between general practices and community pharmacy affected access to prescription medications. METHOD: The research employed a mixed-method approach. This included an online survey (n = 1,010) and in-depth interviews with a subset of survey respondents (n = 38) during the first COVID-19 lockdown (March-May 2020). Respondents were recruited through a snowballing approach, starting with social media and email list contacts of the research team. In keeping with the approach, descriptive statistics of survey data and thematic analysis of qualitative interview and open-ended questions in survey data were combined. RESULTS: For most respondents who received a prescription during lockdown, this was sent directly to the pharmacy. Most people picked up their medication from the pharmacy; home delivery of medication was rare (4%). Survey and interview respondents wanted e-prescribing to continue post-lockdown and described where things worked well and where they encountered delays in the process of acquiring prescription medication. CONCLUSIONS: E-prescribing has the potential to improve access to prescription medication and is convenient for patients. The increase in e-prescribing during lockdown highlighted how the system could be improved, through better feedback about errors, more consistency across practices and pharmacies, more proactive communication with patients, and equitable prescribing costs.

Analgesic Outcomes in a Danish Acute Care Hospital Following Electronic Prescribing and Analgesic Self-Administration.

BACKGROUND: Despite the long-term consequences of poorly controlled postoperative pain, inadequate pain control remains a problem. AIMS: To improve the quality of postoperative pain management, the study site, an acute care hospital in Denmark, introduced electronic prescribing with standard order-sets, and allowed patients to self-administer analgesia. This study aimed to describe analgesic prescribing, prescriptions for multimodal analgesia, analgesic administration, and patients' pain experience, in this context. DESIGN: Point-prevalence survey. SETTINGS: One Danish regional hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive sample of 286 surgical inpatients comprising 65 orthopaedic, 41 gynaecological, 57 urology and 123 gastrointestinal patients. METHODS: We evaluated the quality of postoperative pain management on four postoperative surgical wards using: (1) the Revised American Pain Society Patient Outcome Questionnaire; and (2) patient chart audit. RESULTS: Overall, 89.2% of patients were prescribed a fixed analgesic and 71.7% were prescribed fixed analgesics in multimodal combination. Patterns of multimodal prescribing and administration varied significantly across surgical groups. Patients received 87.7% of available fixed prescriptions and 22.5% of available analgesics prescribed 'as needed'. However, patients' worst pain intensity was high (mean = 5.8/10, SD = 2) and 73.4% reported moderate-to-severe worst pain during the previous 24-hours. Patients who self-administered medications used significantly more fixed-schedule paracetamol (p = .018), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (p = .001), weak (p = .035) and strong (p < .001) opioids. CONCLUSIONS: The availability of multimodal analgesia was high following the introduction of electronic prescribing. However, gaps remain in the administration of both fixed and 'as needed' analgesics for postoperative patients. Findings suggested that allowing patients to self-administer analgesia may increase compliance with fixed schedule prescriptions.

Implications of parenteral chemotherapy dose standardisation in a tertiary oncology centre.

BACKGROUND: Dose banding parenteral chemotherapy has the potential to optimise aseptic unit capacity and reduce drug expenditure without compromising the service provided. METHODS: Dose banding tables from NHS England were implemented into the electronic chemotherapy prescribing system. Compliance to the dose bands was analysed and submitted quarterly. Analysis of drug expenditure, drug use and cost per milligram data was also collected. RESULTS: Expenditure on the 17 drugs identified in the 2016/17 dose standardisation CQUIN reduced by approximately £100,000 per month over the CQUIN despite an increase in the number of prescribed doses of these drugs. At the beginning of the year, the percentage of work compounded in house was 60%, which was reduced to 51% of total workload at the end of the year due to outsourcing commonly prescribed doses from commercial pharmaceutical aseptic manufacturers. CONCLUSION: Dose banding parenteral chemotherapy is an efficient cost-saving strategy which also can help to increase the capacity of the aseptic unit.

Effect of New York State Electronic Prescribing Mandate on Opioid Prescribing Patterns.

BACKGROUND: Drug overdose was the leading cause of injury and death in 2013, with drug misuse and abuse causing approximately 2.5 million emergency department (ED) visits in 2011. The Electronic Prescriptions for Controlled Substances (EPCS) program was created with the goal of decreasing rates of prescription opioid addiction, abuse, diversion, and death by making it more difficult to "doctor-shop" and alter prescriptions. OBJECTIVE: In this study, we describe the opioid-prescribing patterns of emergency physicians after the introduction of the New York State EPCS mandate. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, single-center, descriptive study with a pre-/post-test design. The pre-implementation period used for comparison was April 1-July 31, 2015 and the post-implementation period was April 1-July 31, 2016. All ED discharge prescriptions for opioid medications prior to and after the initiation of New York State EPCS were identified. RESULTS: During the pre-implementation study period, 22,221 patient visits were identified with 1366 patients receiving an opioid prescription. During the post-implementation study period, 22,405 patient visits were identified with 642 patients receiving an opioid prescription. This represented an absolute decrease of 724 (53%) opioid prescriptions (p < 0.0001), which is an absolute difference of 2.3% (95% confidence interval 2.0-2.6%). CONCLUSIONS: There was a significant decline in the overall number of opioid prescriptions after implementation of the New York EPCS mandate.

Why do Belgian Community Pharmacists Still Treat Electronic Prescriptions as Paper-Based?

Belgium is in a transition phase from paper-based prescriptions to electronic prescriptions (ePrescriptions) during which both the paper and electronic format are valid. Since patients still get a paper proof of the ePrescription, sometimes pharmacists use the ePrescription as paper-based prescription. When the government demands a complete dematerialization, i.e. no more paper-based prescriptions, this will no longer be possible. Therefore, we questioned the frequency and reasons for treating an ePrescription as paper-based. The logged interactions in the national database were used to identify possible reasons. The tarification service Koninklijk Limburgs Apothekers Verbond (KLAV) provided prescriptions of June 2018. KLAV supports tarification for community pharmacies all over Belgium, thereby providing a representative sample for the Belgian community pharmacies. A two-stage cluster random sampling technique was applied to retrieve a subset of 10,000 prescriptions. In this subset we identified 4961 ePrescriptions (49.61%) of which 226 (4.56%, in total 2.26%) were treated as paper-based. Reasons observed for this incorrect handling are (1) non-compliance of the community pharmacist; (2) errors in software or handling of the community pharmacist; (3) errors at the prescriber side or patient tries to fraud; (4) incorrectly revoking the ePrescription; and (5) errors in software of prescriber. The main reasons for treating ePrescriptions as paper-based are non-compliance of the community pharmacist (n = 124, 54.87%) by ignoring its digital nature, and errors in software or handling of the community pharmacist (n = 85, 37.61%). Future research is necessary to investigate user opinions and to measure the impact of introducing ePrescribing in the daily routine.

Electronic physician notifications to improve guideline-based anticoagulation in atrial fibrillation: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticoagulants reduce the risk of stroke in patients with atrial fibrillation. However, many patients with atrial fibrillation at elevated stroke risk are not treated with oral anticoagulants. OBJECTIVE: To test whether electronic notifications sent to primary care physicians increase the proportion of ambulatory patients prescribed oral anticoagulants. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial conducted from February to May 2017 within 18 practices in an academic primary care network. PARTICIPANTS: Primary care physicians (n = 175) and their patients with atrial fibrillation, at elevated stroke risk, and not prescribed oral anticoagulants. INTERVENTION: Patients of each physician were randomized to the notification or usual care arm. Physicians received baseline email notifications and up to three reminders with patient information, educational material and primary care guidelines for anticoagulation management, and surveys in the notification arm. MAIN MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of patients prescribed oral anticoagulants at 3 months in the notification (n = 972) vs. usual care (n = 1364) arms, compared using logistic regression with clustering by physician. Secondary measures included survey-based physician assessment of reasons why patients were not prescribed oral anticoagulants and how primary care physicians might be influenced by the notification. KEY RESULTS: Over 3 months, a small proportion of patients were newly prescribed oral anticoagulants with no significant difference in the notification (3.9%, 95% CI 2.8-5.3%) and usual care (3.2%, 95% CI 2.4-4.2%) arms (p = 0.37). The most common, non-exclusive reasons why patients were not on oral anticoagulants included atrial fibrillation was transient (30%) or paroxysmal (12%), patient/family declined (22%), high bleeding risk (20%), fall risk (19%), and frailty (10%). For 95% of patients, physicians stated they would not change their management after reviewing the alert. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic physician notification did not increase anticoagulation in patients with atrial fibrillation at elevated stroke risk. Primary care physicians did not prescribe anticoagulants because they perceived the bleeding risk was too high or stroke risk was too low. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02950285.

Can We Improve Physical Health Monitoring for Patients Taking Antipsychotics on a Mental Health Inpatient Unit?

BACKGROUND: Patients with severe mental illness are at risk of medical complications, including cardiovascular disease, metabolic syndrome, and diabetes. Given this vulnerability, combined with metabolic risks of antipsychotics, physical health monitoring is critical. Inpatient admission is an opportunity to screen for medical comorbidities. Our objective was to improve the rates of physical health monitoring on an inpatient psychiatry unit through implementation of an electronic standardized order set. METHODS: Using a clinical audit tool, we completed a baseline retrospective audit (96 eligible charts) of patients aged 18 to 100 years, discharged between January and March 2012, prescribed an antipsychotic for 3 or more days. We then developed and implemented a standard electronic admission order set and provided training to inpatient clinical staff. We completed a second chart audit of patients discharged between January and March 2016 (190 eligible charts) to measure improvement in physical health monitoring and intervention rates for abnormal results. RESULTS: In the 2012 audit, thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), blood pressure, blood glucose, fasting lipids, electrocardiogram (ECG), and height/weight were measured in 71%, 92%, 31%, 36%, 51%, and 75% of patients, respectively. In the 2016 audit, TSH, blood pressure, blood glucose, fasting lipids, ECG, and height/weight were measured in 86%, 96%, 96%, 64%, 87%, and 71% of patients, respectively. There were statistically significant improvements (P < 0.05) in monitoring rates for blood glucose, lipids, ECG, and TSH. Intervention rates for abnormal blood glucose and/or lipids (feedback to family doctor and/or patient, consultation to hospitalist, endocrinology, and/or dietician) did not change between 2012 and 2016. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic standardized order set can be used as a tool to improve screening for physical health comorbidity in patients with severe mental illness receiving antipsychotic medications.

Assessing the accuracy of using diagnostic codes from administrative data to infer antidepressant treatment indications: a validation study.

PURPOSE: To assess the accuracy of using diagnostic codes from administrative data to infer treatment indications for antidepressants prescribed in primary care. METHODS: Validation study of administrative diagnostic codes for 13 plausible indications for antidepressants compared with physician-documented treatment indications from an indication-based electronic prescribing system in Quebec, Canada. The analysis included all antidepressant prescriptions written by primary care physicians between January 1, 2003 and December 31, 2012 using the electronic prescribing system. Patient prescribed antidepressants were linked to physician claims and hospitalization data to obtain all diagnoses recorded in the past year. RESULTS: Diagnostic codes had poor sensitivity for all treatment indications, ranging from a high of only 31.2% (95% CI, 26.8%-35.9%) for anxiety/stress disorders to as low as 1.3% (95% CI, 0.0%-5.2%) for sexual dysfunction. Sensitivity was notably worse among older patients and patients with more chronic comorbidities. Physician claims data were a better source of diagnostic codes for antidepressant treatment indications than hospitalization data. CONCLUSIONS: Administrative diagnostic codes are poor proxies for antidepressant treatment indications. Future work should determine whether the use of other variables in administrative data besides diagnostic codes can improve the ability to predict antidepressant treatment indications.

Pharmacy Customers' Experiences With Electronic Prescriptions: Cross-Sectional Survey on Nationwide Implementation in Finland.

BACKGROUND: One of the forerunners in electronic health, Finland has introduced electronic prescriptions (ePrescriptions) nationwide by law. This has led to significant changes for pharmacy customers. Despite the worldwide ambition to develop ePrescription services, there are few reports of nationally adopted systems and particularly on the experiences of pharmacy customers. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate Finnish pharmacy customers' (1) experiences with purchasing medicines with ePrescriptions; (2) experiences with renewing ePrescriptions and acting on behalf of someone else at the pharmacy; (3) ways in which customers keep up to date with their ePrescriptions; and (4) overall satisfaction with ePrescriptions. METHODS: Questionnaires were distributed to 2913 pharmacy customers aged ≥18 years purchasing prescription medicines for themselves with an ePrescription in 18 community pharmacies across Finland in autumn 2015. Customers' experiences were explored with 10 structured questions. The data were stored in SPSS for Windows and subjected to descriptive analysis, chi-square, Fisher exact, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, the Mann-Whitney U, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. RESULTS: Completed questionnaires were returned by 1288 customers, a response rate of 44.19% (1288/2913). The majority of the respondents did not encounter any problems during pharmacy visits (1161/1278, 90.85%) and were informed about the current status of their ePrescriptions after their medication was dispensed (1013/1276, 79.44%). Over half of the respondents had usually received a patient instruction sheet from their physician (752/1255, 59.92%), and nearly all of them regarded its content as clear (711/724, 98.2%). Half of the respondents had renewed their ePrescriptions through the pharmacy (645/1281, 50.35%), and one-third of them had acted on behalf of someone else with ePrescriptions (432/1280, 33.75%). Problems were rarely encountered in the renewal process (49/628, 7.8%) or when acting on behalf of another person (25/418, 6.0%) at the pharmacy. The most common way of keeping up to date with ePrescriptions was to ask at the pharmacy (631/1278, 49.37%). The vast majority of the respondents were satisfied with ePrescriptions as a whole (1221/1274, 95.84%). CONCLUSIONS: Finnish pharmacy customers are satisfied with the recently implemented nationwide ePrescription system. They seldom have any difficulties purchasing medicines, renewing their ePrescriptions, or acting on behalf of someone else at the pharmacy. Customers usually keep up to date with their ePrescriptions by asking at the pharmacy. However, some customers are unaware of the practices or have difficulty keeping up to date with the status of their ePrescriptions. The provision of relevant information and assistance by health care professionals is therefore required to promote customers' adoption of the ePrescription system.

Audit cycle of the provision of compression garments on prescription.

The wearing of compression garments is an essential aspect of the management of lymphoedema. Patients however, do not always receive the requested garment on an NHS prescription from their general practitioner (GP). Through an audit cycle over 3 years, necessary changes in clinical practice were identified and introduced. The aim was to improve the number of patients obtaining the correct garment on an NHS prescription. The audit standard was not met in any of the audits and the conclusion made is that compression garments are difficult to find on NHS electronic prescribing systems leading to a delay in patients receiving their prescription and a risk of error due to the wide range of options available. Further work is necessary to ensure that electronic prescribing systems address the problem of product recognition for compression garments so that the process of obtaining compression garments is smooth, accurate and timely for patients and their GPs.

Hospital electronic prescribing system implementation impact on discharge information communication and prescribing errors: a before and after study.

PURPOSE: The study aimed to test the hypothesis that hospital electronic prescribing and medicine administration system (HEPMA) implementation impacted patient discharge letter quality, nature and frequency of prescribing errors. METHOD: A quasi experimental before and after retrospective case note review was conducted in one United Kingdom district general hospital. The total sample size was 318 (random samples of 159 before and after implementation), calculated to achieve a 10% error reduction with a power of 80% and p < 0.05. Adult patients discharged after ≥24-h inpatient stay were assessed for discharge information documentation quality using a modified validated discharge document template. Prescribing errors were classified as medicine omissions, commissions, incorrect dose/frequency/duration, drug interactions, therapeutic duplications or missing/inaccurate allergy information. Post-implementation assessments were undertaken 4 months following HEPMA implementation. Error severity was determined by a multidisciplinary panel consensus using the Medications at Transitions and Clinical Handoffs (MATCH) study validated scoring system. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in patient demographics between the pre- and post-implementation groups. Discharge information documentation quality improved; allergy documentation increased from 11 to 159/159 (p < 0.0001). The number of patients with prescribing errors reduced significantly from 158 to 37/159 (p < 0.001). Prescribing error category incidence identified in pre-implementation patients was reduced (e.g. omission incidence from 66 to 18/159 (p < 0.001)), although a new error type (sociotechnical [errors caused by the system]) was identified post-implementation (n = 8 patients). Post-implementation prescribing errors severity rating identified 8/37 as likely to cause potential patient harm. CONCLUSION: HEPMA implementation was associated with improved discharge documentation quality, statistically significant prescribing error reduction and prescribing error type alteration. There remains a need to be alert for potential prescribing errors.

The impacts of a pharmacist-managed outpatient clinic and chemotherapy-directed electronic order sets for monitoring oral chemotherapy.

Objectives Patients treated with oral chemotherapy appear to have less contact with the treating providers. As a result, safety, adherence, medication therapy monitoring, and timely follow-up may be compromised. The trend of treating cancer with oral chemotherapy agents is on the rise. However, standard clinical guidance is still lacking for prescribing, monitoring, patient education, and follow-up of patients on oral chemotherapy across the healthcare settings. The purpose of this project is to establish an oral chemotherapy monitoring clinic, to create drug and lab specific provider order sets for prescribing and lab monitoring, and ultimately to ensure safe and effective treatment of the veterans we serve. Methods A collaborative agreement was reached among oncology pharmacists, a pharmacy resident, two oncologists, and a physician assistant to establish a pharmacist-managed oral chemotherapy monitoring clinic at the VA Sierra Nevada Healthcare System. Drug-specific electronic order sets for prescribing and lab monitoring were created for initiating new drug therapy and prescription renewal. The order sets were created to be provider-centric, minimizing clicks needed to order necessary medications and lab monitoring. A standard progress note template was developed for documenting interventions made by the clinic. Patients new to an oral chemotherapy regimen were first counseled by an oncology pharmacist. The patients were then enrolled into the oral chemotherapy monitoring clinic for subsequent follow up and pharmacist interventions. Further, patients lacking monitoring or missing provider appointments were captured through a Clinical Dashboard developed by the US Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) Regional Office (VISN21) using SQL Server Reporting Services. Between September 2014 and April 2015, a total of 68 patients on different oral chemotherapy agents were enrolled into the clinic. Results Out of the 68 patients enrolled into the oral chemotherapy monitoring clinic, 31 patients (45%) were identified as having a therapy-related problem with their oral chemotherapy regimen on a gross measure for safety and appropriateness of medication management during the course of eight months follow-up between September 2014 and April 2015. In addition, the clinic helped to reestablish care for three patients (4.4%) who were lost to follow-up. The clinic identified 12 patients (17.6%) non-adherent to their prescribed regimen in some degree, where patients were suspected to miss doses due to delay in refilling prescriptions at least three days later than the expected date. However, these patients denied non-adherence. Among them, six patients (8.8%) were truly non-adherent. These patients stated that they had missed at least one day of therapy or were not taking the medication as prescribed. Medication regimen errors were discovered for five patients, accounting for a 7.3% medication-related error rate. Finally, seven patients (10.3%) were found to have an adverse reaction attributed to their oral chemotherapy. Two of them (2.9%) developed severe adverse reactions (Grade 3 and 4), which required hospitalization or immediate dose de-escalation. Conclusions The pilot clinic was able to identify current deficiencies and gaps in our practice settings for managing oral chemotherapy in a Veterans population. The oral chemotherapy monitoring clinic played a proactive role to identify preventable medication errors, monitor medication therapy, improve adherence, manage adverse drug reactions and re-establish care for patients who were lost to follow-up. The results suggest that close monitoring and follow-up of patients on oral chemotherapy is crucial to achieve therapeutic goals, improve patient safety and adherence, and to reduce drug adverse events and health care cost.

A quality improvement initiative to optimize dosing of surgical antimicrobial prophylaxis.

BACKGROUND: The risk of surgical site infections is reduced with appropriate timing and dosing of preoperative antimicrobials. Based on evolving national guidelines, we increased the preoperative dose of cefazolin from 25 to 30 mg·kg-1 . This quality improvement project describes an improvement initiative to develop standard work processes to ensure appropriate dosing. AIMS: The primary aim was to deliver cefazolin 30 mg·kg-1 to at least 90% of indicated patients. The secondary aim was to determine differences between accuracy of cefazolin doses when given as an electronic order compared to a verbal order. METHODS: Data were collected from January 1, 2012 to May 31, 2016. A quality improvement team of perioperative physicians, nurses, and pharmacists implemented a series of interventions including new electronic medical record order sets, personal provider antibiotic dose badges, and utilization of pharmacists to prepare antibiotics to increase compliance with the recommended dose. Process compliance was measured using a statistical process control chart, and dose compliance was measured through electronic analysis of the electronic medical record. Secondary aim data were displayed as percentage of dose compliance. An unpaired t-test was used to determine differences between groups. RESULTS: Between January 1, 2012 and May 31, 2016, cefazolin was administered to 9086 patients. The mean compliance of cefazolin at 30 mg·kg-1 from May 2013 to March 2014 was 40%, which prompted initiation of this project. From April 2014 to May 2016, a series of interventions were deployed. The mean compliance from September 2015 to May 2016 was 93% with significantly reduced variation and no special cause variation, indicating that the process was in control at the target primary aim. There were 649 cefazolin administrations given verbally and 1929 given with an electronic order between October 1, 2014 and May 31, 2016. During this time period, the rate of compliance of administering cefazolin at 30 mg·kg-1 was significantly higher when given after an electronic order than when given verbally, 94% vs 76%. CONCLUSION: This comprehensive quality improvement project improved practitioner compliance with evidence-based preoperative antimicrobial dosing recommendations to reduce the risk of surgical site infections.

Automation bias in electronic prescribing.

BACKGROUND: Clinical decision support (CDS) in e-prescribing can improve safety by alerting potential errors, but introduces new sources of risk. Automation bias (AB) occurs when users over-rely on CDS, reducing vigilance in information seeking and processing. Evidence of AB has been found in other clinical tasks, but has not yet been tested with e-prescribing. This study tests for the presence of AB in e-prescribing and the impact of task complexity and interruptions on AB. METHODS: One hundred and twenty students in the final two years of a medical degree prescribed medicines for nine clinical scenarios using a simulated e-prescribing system. Quality of CDS (correct, incorrect and no CDS) and task complexity (low, low + interruption and high) were varied between conditions. Omission errors (failure to detect prescribing errors) and commission errors (acceptance of false positive alerts) were measured. RESULTS: Compared to scenarios with no CDS, correct CDS reduced omission errors by 38.3% (p < .0001, n = 120), 46.6% (p < .0001, n = 70), and 39.2% (p < .0001, n = 120) for low, low + interrupt and high complexity scenarios respectively. Incorrect CDS increased omission errors by 33.3% (p < .0001, n = 120), 24.5% (p < .009, n = 82), and 26.7% (p < .0001, n = 120). Participants made commission errors, 65.8% (p < .0001, n = 120), 53.5% (p < .0001, n = 82), and 51.7% (p < .0001, n = 120). Task complexity and interruptions had no impact on AB. CONCLUSIONS: This study found evidence of AB omission and commission errors in e-prescribing. Verification of CDS alerts is key to avoiding AB errors. However, interventions focused on this have had limited success to date. Clinicians should remain vigilant to the risks of CDS failures and verify CDS.

Automatic Errors: A Case Series on the Errors Inherent in Electronic Prescribing.

The adoption of electronic prescribing is on the rise, as it reduces medication errors compared to handwritten orders. The inadvertent dispensing of discontinued medications is a type of medication error that is less well described, but one that can lead to adverse events. Software for electronic prescriptions transmits orders for refills or new prescriptions, but not discontinuations, to the pharmacy. Medications that have been stopped are displayed only at the prescribing facility's electronic medical record (EMR). This report describes five cases in which the pharmacy dispensed electronically discontinued medications, two of which contributed to adverse outcomes.

Developing consensus on hospital prescribing indicators of potential harm for infants and children.

AIMS: The aim of the study was to develop a list of hospital based paediatric prescribing indicators that can be used to assess the impact of electronic prescribing or clinical decision support tools on paediatric prescribing errors. METHODS: Two rounds of an electronic consensus method (eDelphi) were carried out with 21 expert panellists from the UK. Panellists were asked to score each prescribing indicator for its likelihood of occurrence and severity of outcome should the error occur. The scores were combined to produce a risk score and a median score for each indicator calculated. The degree of consensus between panellists was defined as the proportion that gave a risk score in the same category as the median. Indicators were included if a consensus of 80% or higher was achieved and were in the high risk categories. RESULTS: Each of the 21 panellists completed an exploratory round and two rounds of scoring. This identified 41 paediatric prescribing indicators with a high risk rating and greater than 80% consensus. The most common error type within the indicators was wrong dose (n = 19) and the most common drug classes were antimicrobials (n = 10) and cardiovascular (n = 7). CONCLUSIONS: A set of 41 paediatric prescribing indicators describing potential harm for the hospital setting has been identified by an expert panel. The indicators provide a standardized method of evaluation of prescribing data on both paper and electronic systems. They can also be used to assess implementation of clinical decision support systems or other quality improvement initiatives.