Exploring Australian pharmacists' views toward reducing the risk of medicines-related harm in aged care residents.

Medicines-related harm is common in older people living in residential aged care facilities (RACFs). Pharmacists offering services in the aged care sector may play a key role in reducing medicines-related injury. This study aimed to explore Australian pharmacists' views toward reducing the risk of medicines-related harm in older residents. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 15 Pharmacists across Australia providing services (e.g., through the provision of medication reviews, supplying medications, or being an embedded pharmacist) to RACFs identified via convenience sampling. Data were analyzed by thematic analysis using an inductive approach. Medicines-related harm was thought to occur due to polypharmacy, inappropriate medicines, anticholinergic activity, sedative load, and lack of reconciliation of medicines. Pharmacists reported that strong relationships, education of all stakeholders, and funding for pharmacists were facilitators in reducing medicines-related harm. Pharmacists stated that renal impairment, frailty, staff non-engagement, staff burnout, family pressure, and underfunding were barriers to reducing medicines-related harm. Additionally, the participants suggested pharmacist education, experience, and mentoring improve aged care interactions. Pharmacists believed that the irrational use of medicines increases harm in aged care residents, and medicines-specific (e.g., sedative load) and patient-specific risk factors (e.g., renal impairment) are associated with injuries in residents. To reduce medicines-related harm, the participants highlighted the need for increased funding for pharmacists, improving all stakeholders' awareness about medicines-associated harms through education, and ensuring collaboration between healthcare professionals caring for older residents.

Quality of MedDRA® Coding in a Sample of COVID-19 Vaccine Medication Error Data.

INTRODUCTION: In recent years, there has been increasing interest from regulatory agencies and scientific organisations into the recording, coding and reporting of medication errors. Accuracy and consistency in the handling of medication error reports ensure the safety and effectiveness of medicines and provide reliable information to both healthcare professionals and patients. OBJECTIVE: The authors have examined a sample of Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA®) coded reports that describe medication errors to assess the accuracy and consistency of MedDRA® coding, and to identify the main types of coding errors for the newly introduced COVID-19 vaccines. METHODS: The sample of coded terms was assessed by two MedDRA® experts applying the Four Eyes Principle. It included 1500 reported terms drawn from the Uppsala Monitoring Centre database reported up to 25 August, 2021, describing medication errors for COVID-19 vaccines with their assigned MedDRA® terms. RESULTS: One third of the records could not be assessed because of incomplete or unclear verbatims. In one third, MedDRA® term assignments were correct, but another third of the sample was not adequately coded. The most frequent coding errors corresponded to vague MedDRA® Preferred Term assignments despite more detailed information being available in the verbatim for a more precise coding. This observation is similar to findings in the EudraVigilance database, where some of the most frequently assigned MedDRA® terms for medication errors also represent vague concepts. CONCLUSIONS: The findings indicate that understanding of medication error documentation and of the importance of accurate extraction of information from case narratives, as well as knowledge of MedDRA® content and coding guidelines need to be reinforced. The authors provide useful references to training opportunities and to the applicable International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements for Pharmaceuticals for Human Use-Endorsed Guides for MedDRA® users.

Evaluation of the effectiveness of electronic prescription in reducing medical and medical errors (systematic review study).

INTRODUCTION: The use of electronic systems in prescription is considered as the final solution to overcome the many problems of the paper transcription process, especially with the outbreak of Coronavirus needs more attention than before. But despite the many advantages, its implementation faces many challenges and obstacles. Therefore, the present study was conducted to review the effectiveness of computerized physician order entry systems (CPOE) on relative risk reduction on medication error and adverse drug events (ADE). METHOD: This study is one of the systematic review studies that was conducted in 2021. In this study, searching for keywords such as E-Electronic Prescription, Patient safety, Medication Errors prescription, Drug Interactions, orginal articles from 2000 to October-2020 in the valid databases such as ISI web of Science PubMed Embase, Scopus and search engines like google was done. The included studies were based on the main objectives of the study and based on the inclusion criteria after several stages of review and quality evaluation. In fact, the main criteria for selecting articles were studies that compared the rate of medication errors with or without assessing the associated harms (real or potential) before and after the implementation of EMS. RESULTS: Out of 110 selected studies after initial screening, only 16 articles were selected due to their relevance. Among the final studies, there was a significant heterogeneity. Only 6 studies were of good quality. Of the 10 studies prescribing error rates, 9 reported reductions, but variable denominators prevented meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of systemic drug errors. 5 cases reported their occurrence slightly. Out of 9 cases that analyzed the effects on drug error rate, 7 cases showed a significant relative reduction between 13 and 99%. Four of the six studies that analyzed the effects on potential ADEs showed a significant relative reduction of between 35 and 98%. Two of the four studies that analyzed the effect of ADEs showed a relative reduction of between 30 and 84%. CONCLUSION: Finally, e-prescribing seems to reduce the risk of medication errors and ADE. However, the studies differed significantly in terms of setting, design, quality and results. More randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are needed to further improve the evidence of health informatics information.

Developing Strategic Recommendations for Implementing Smart Pumps in Advanced Healthcare Systems to Improve Intravenous Medication Safety.

Avoidable harm associated with medication is a persistent problem in health systems and the use of preprogrammed infusion devices ('smart pumps') and data monitoring is seen as a core approach to mitigating and reducing the incidence of these harms. However, smart pumps are costly to procure, configure and maintain (in both human and financial terms) and are often poorly implemented. Variation in the manner in which medicines are prepared and used within complex modern healthcare systems exacerbates these challenges, and a strategic human-centred approach is needed to support their implementation. A symposium of 36 clinical and academic medication safety experts met virtually to discuss the current 'state of the art' and to propose strategic recommendations to support the implementation of medication administration technology to improve medication safety. The recommendations were that health systems (1) standardise infusion concentrations to facilitate the development of ready-to-administer formulations of frequently used medicines, and support 'out of the box' programming of infusion devices; (2) develop and implement drug libraries using human-centred approaches and the aforementioned standard concentrations, with a theoretical understanding of how devices are used in practice; (3) develop standardised metrics and outcomes to support the interpretation of data produced by infusion devices; (4) involve all stakeholders in the development of drug libraries and metrics to ensure broad understanding of the devices, their benefits and limitations; and (5) leverage input into device design, working with manufacturers and users. Using this strategic approach, it is then possible to envisage and plan real-world implementation studies using a uniform approach to quantify improvements in safety, efficiency and cost effectiveness.

Effect of electronic prescriptions on the safety of hospitalized pediatric patients. / Efecto del empleo de prescripciones informatizadas en la seguridad de pacientes pediátricos hospitalizados.

INTRODUCTION: Prescription errors are the most common cause of preventable errors. Electronic prescription (EP) systems may help to reduce errors and improve the quality of care. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effect of EP on the prevalence of prescription errors and related adverse events (AE) among hospitalized pediatric patients. To assess EP adherence, acceptability, and suitability among users. METHODS: Hybrid, descriptive, and quasi-experimental, before-and-after design. Prescriptions made to hospitalized patients were included, estimating the prevalence of prescription errors and related AE in the pre- and post- EP implementation periods at a children's hospital (CH) and a general hospital (GH) used as control. Adherence was assessed based on the proportion of EP among all prescriptions registered in the post-implementation period. The acceptability and suitability of EP implementation was assessed via a user survey. RESULTS: The prevalence of prescription errors pre- and post-EP implementation at the CH was compared and a statistically significant reduction was observed in both hospitals: CH: 29.1 versus 19.9 prescription errors/100 prescriptions (OR: 1.65; 95% CI: 1.34-2.02; p < 0.01). GH: 24.9 versus 13.6 prescription errors/100 prescriptions (OR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.5-2.8; p < 0.01). The rate of overall adherence to EP was 83%. The implementation of EP was adequately acceptable and suitable. CONCLUSION: The prevalence of prescription errors reduced 30% after the implementation of EP. The overall adherence to EP was adequate.

Introducción. Los errores en prescripción médica (EPM) son la causa más frecuente de errores prevenibles. El empleo de sistemas de prescripción informatizada (PI) contribuiría a disminuir el error y a mejorar la calidad de atención. Objetivos. Evaluar el efecto de la PI en la prevalencia de EPM y eventos adversos (EA) relacionados en pacientes pediátricos hospitalizados. Evaluar la adherencia, aceptabilidad y apropiabilidad de la herramienta por parte de los usuarios. Método. Diseño híbrido, descriptivo y cuasiexperimental tipo antes-después. Se incluyeron prescripciones médicas de pacientes hospitalizados, calculando la prevalencia de EPM y EA relacionados, en los períodos pre-y posimplementación de la PI en un hospital pediátrico (HP) y en uno general (HG) que se tomó como control. Se evaluó la adherencia mediante la proporción de las PI sobre las totales registradas en el período posimplementación. Se evaluó la aceptabilidad y apropiabilidad de la implementación por encuesta a los usuarios. Resultados. Al comparar la prevalencia de EPM pre- y posimplementación en el HP, se observó una disminución estadísticamente significativa en los dos hospitales: HP 29,1 versus 19,9 EPM/100 prescripciones (OR: 1,65; IC95 %: 1,34-2,02; p < 0,01). En el HG 24,9 versus 13,6 EPM/100 prescripciones (OR: 2,1; IC95 %: 1,5-2,8; p < 0,01). La tasa de adherencia global a la PI fue del 83 %. La implementación presentó aceptabilidad y apropiabilidad satisfactoria. Conclusión. La prevalencia de EPM se redujo un 30 % posimplementación. La adherencia global a la herramienta fue satisfactoria.

Delivering interprofessional patient safety education using storytelling, a real-life medication error, and synchronous online platform.

INTRODUCTION: Interprofessional education (IPE) about patient safety positively impacts safety and reduces errors but is challenging to deliver. We aimed to determine if a synchronous virtual IPE program using storytelling and interactive learning impacted student perceptions about patient safety. METHODS: An IPE patient safety program involving medical and pharmacy students was synchronously delivered virtually due to the COVID-19 pandemic. The program was framed using storytelling about a medication error told by a family member. Post-program survey data, exploring participants' perspectives on the program, collected between July 2020 and November 2020 was retrospectively reviewed. Quantitative results were grouped by the five components of the program. Responses within each category were averaged to generate a summary measure of each student's experience. Qualitative feedback from two survey questions was evaluated. RESULTS: There were 236 (96.7% of participants) completed surveys included in the analysis. High proportions of participants responded favorably across all five components of the survey. Qualitative responses were largely positive, with themes of increased empathy, behavior, and attitude change, and meaning making. CONCLUSION: An interactive IPE patient safety program using storytelling about a real-life medication error to frame activities and utilizing a virtual platform was a favorable and impactful method to educate students.

Veterinary prescription errors in a community pharmacy setting: A retrospective review.

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacies are poised to see more veterinary prescriptions as a result of increased pet ownership especially during the coronavirus disease 19 pandemic. Concern has been raised about the lack of veterinary pharmacy training that community pharmacists receive, but no studies have evaluated the actual prevalence of errors in veterinary prescriptions including the prevalence of prescription writing errors. OBJECTIVES: This study identifies the prevalence of errors in veterinary prescriptions at independent community pharmacies. METHODS: An electronic form was used to ensure required information was pulled from the pharmacy software systems in a consistent manner. Information was pulled from the hard copy image and the prescription label corresponding to that fill. Prescribing trends, such as species and errors, were assessed using descriptive statistics for the overall sample. Error comparisons between written and verbal prescriptions and between weight-based and nonweight-based prescriptions were assessed using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. RESULTS: Weight, although not legally required but clinically necessary for evaluation of veterinary prescriptions, was omitted from 97.8% of prescriptions. When evaluating the prevalence of errors between handwritten and verbal prescriptions, it was more likely to see errors in prescriptions handwritten by the veterinarian (105 of 119; 88%) than verbal prescriptions (257 of 389; 66%). Conversely, handwritten prescriptions were less likely to omit the required Drug Enforcement Agency number on controlled substance prescriptions. CONCLUSION: Based on the number of errors seen in both handwritten and verbal prescriptions, emphasis should be placed on training pharmacists to be competent in clinically evaluating veterinary prescriptions and training veterinarians on handwriting prescriptions to include both legally and clinically required information needed before dispensing.

Interventions designed to improve the safety and quality of therapeutic anticoagulation in an inpatient electronic medical record.

IMPORTANCE: Anticoagulants are high-risk medications with the potential to cause significant patient harm or death. Digital transformation is occurring in hospital practice and it is essential to implement effective, evidence-based strategies for these medications in an electronic medical record (EMR). OBJECTIVE: To systematically appraise the literature to determine which EMR interventions have improved the safety and quality of therapeutic anticoagulation in an inpatient hospital setting. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, and the International Pharmaceutical Database were searched for suitable publications. Articles that met eligibility criteria up to September 2018 were included. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42018104899). The web-based software platform Covidence® was used for screening and data extraction. Studies were grouped according to the type of intervention and the outcomes measured. Where relevant, a bias assessment was performed. RESULTS: We found 2624 candidate articles and 27 met inclusion criteria. They included 3 randomised controlled trials, 4 cohort studies and 20 pre/post observational studies. There were four major interventions; computerised physician order entry (CPOE) (n = 4 studies), clinical decision support system (CDSS) methods (n = 21), dashboard utilisation (n = 1) and EMR implementation in general (n = 1). Seven outcomes were used to summarise the study results. Most research focused on prescribing or documentation compliance (n = 18). The remaining study outcome measures were: medication errors (n = 9), adverse drug events (n = 5), patient outcomes (morbidity/mortality/length of hospital stay/re-hospitalisation) (n = 5), quality use of anticoagulant (n = 4), end-user acceptance (n = 4), cost effectiveness (n = 1). CONCLUSION: Despite the research cited, limited benefits have been demonstrated to date. It appears healthcare organisations are yet to determine optimal, evidence-based-methods to improve EMR utilisation. Further evaluation, collaboration and work are necessary to measure and leverage the potential benefits of digital health systems. Most research evaluating therapeutic anticoagulation management within an EMR focused on prescribing or documentation compliance, with less focus on clinical impact to the patient or cost effectiveness. Evidence suggests that CPOE in conjunction with CDSS is needed to effectively manage therapeutic anticoagulation. Targets for robust research include the integration of 'stealth' alerts, nomograms into digital systems and the use of dashboards within clinical practice.

Pharmacist intervention on prescribing errors: Use of a standardized approach in the inpatient setting.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to implement a standardized process across health systems to determine the prevalence and clinical relevance of prescribing errors intercepted by pharmacists. METHODS: This prospective, multicenter, observational study was conducted across 11 hospitals. Pharmacist-intercepted prescribing errors were collected during inpatient order verification over 6 consecutive weeks utilizing a standardized documentation process. The potential harm of each error was evaluated using a modified National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC-MERP) index with physician validation, and errors were stratified into those with potentially low, serious, or life-threatening harm. Endpoints included the median error rate per 1,000 patient days, error type, and potential harm with correlating cost avoidance. RESULTS: Pharmacists intervened on 7,187 errors, resulting in a mean error rate of 39 errors per 1,000 patient days. Among the errors, 46.6% (n = 3,349) were determined to have potentially serious consequences and 2.4% (n = 175) could have been life-threatening if not intercepted. This equates to $874,000 in avoided cost. The top 3 error types occurring with the highest frequency were "wrong dose/rate/frequency" (n = 2,298, 32.0%), "duplicate therapy" (n = 1,431, 19.9%), and "wrong timing" (n = 960, 13.4%). "Wrong dose/rate/frequency" (n = 49, 28%), "duplicate therapy" (n = 26, 14.9%), and "drug-disease interaction" (n = 24, 13.7%) errors occurred with the highest frequency among errors with potential for life-threatening harm. "Wrong dose/rate/frequency" (n = 1,028, 30.7%), "wrong timing" (n = 573, 17.1%), and "duplicate therapy" (n = 482, 14.4%) errors occurred with the highest frequency among errors with potentially serious harm. CONCLUSION: Documentation of pharmacist intervention on prescribing errors via a standardized process creates a platform for multicenter analysis of prescribing error trends and an opportunity for development of system-wide solutions to reduce potential harm from prescribing errors.

Use of failure modes and effects analysis to mitigate potential risks prior to implementation of an intravenous compounding technology.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to identify potential failure points in a new chemotherapy preparation technology and to implement changes that prevent or minimize the consequences of those failures before they occur using the failure modes and effects analysis (FMEA) approach. METHODS: An FMEA was conducted by a team of medication safety pharmacists, oncology pharmacists and technicians, leadership from informatics, investigational drug, and medication safety services, and representatives from the technology vendor. Failure modes were scored using both Risk Priority Number (RPN) and Risk Hazard Index (RHI) scores. RESULTS: The chemotherapy preparation workflow was defined in a 41-step process with 16 failure modes. The RPN and RHI scores were identical for each failure mode because all failure modes were considered detectable. Five failure modes, all attributable to user error, were deemed to pose the highest risk. Mitigation strategies and system changes were identified for 2 failure modes, with subsequent system modifications resulting in reduced risk. CONCLUSION: The FMEA was a useful tool for risk mitigation and workflow optimization prior to implementation of an intravenous compounding technology. The process of conducting this study served as a collaborative and proactive approach to reducing the potential for medication errors upon adoption of new technology into the chemotherapy preparation process.

Accuracy and safety of medication histories obtained at the time of intensive care unit admission of delirious or mechanically ventilated patients.

PURPOSE: Obtaining an accurate medication history from patients on hospital admission is a priority in pharmacy practice. Timely and accurate histories are imperative as they may help determine the etiology of illness and prevent medication errors. We conducted a quality improvement project to assess the accuracy of alternate-source medication histories obtained for critically ill patients who were delirious or mechanically ventilated at the time of intensive care unit admission. METHODS: Included patients were 18 years of age or older, admitted to the medical intensive care unit from August 2017 through January 2018, and had a medication history obtained from a family member or outpatient pharmacy due to active delirium or mechanical ventilation. Patients were directly interviewed after resolution of delirium or extubation. Discrepancies between the initial and follow-up histories were documented and categorized using the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) Index for Categorizing Medication Errors. RESULTS: Forty patients were included. One hundred four discrepancies were documented, with a median of 2 discrepancies per patient. The most common types of discrepancies were addition (51.9%), followed by omission (24.0%). NCC MERP index category A (51%) was the most common error classification identified. CONCLUSION: Discrepancies between initial and follow-up medication histories occurred at a frequent rate in delirious or mechanically ventilated patients; however, these discrepancies tended to be of low risk severity.

[Contribution of a hospital pharmacy team to critical care of patients infected with SARS-CoV-2]. / Contribution d'une équipe de pharmacie hospitalière à la prise en charge en réanimation des patients infectés par le SARS-CoV-2.

With regard to the hospital drug supply chain, the safest system is the individual automated drug dispensing one provided by the pharmacy. For several years we have been trying to convince hospital decision-makers to set it up. In the meantime, to mitigate the risks of medication errors incurred by patients and caregivers, we have set up several work teams within the care units. These teams, made up of one pharmacist and one or two hospital pharmacy technicians, who notably manage the medicine cabinets in care units. The close collaboration with doctors and nurses developed over the years was a determining factor when it became necessary to provide the newly created additional intensive care units with drugs and medical devices (MDs) in order to cope with the crisis triggered by the SARS-CoV-2 epidemic. Daily monitoring of the drugs consumed by each patient, particularly neuromuscular blocking agents and MDs was a key element in managing stocks and anticipating changes of drugs, packaging and/or devices references. These facts give weight to the Claris report published in France which recognizes that the interactions of pharmacy technicians and pharmacists in the care units have positive effects in terms of quality and safety of patient care. They highlight the dangers to which patients and caregivers are exposed on Saturdays, Sundays and holidays when the pharmacy is closed. They legitimize the question of extending the opening of the pharmacy with a full team 365 days a year.

Comparison of IV oncology infusions compounded via robotics and gravimetrics-assisted workflow processes.

PURPOSE: A study was conducted to compare an intravenous (IV) gravimetric technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) platform to an IV robotic system. In the study we reviewed both IV technology platforms using the same gravimetric quality assurance system, which allowed for direct comparison. METHODS: All oncology preparations compounded from January 2016 through December 2018 using either system were included in our retrospective analysis. Final preparation accuracy, IV system precision, and workflow throughput (analyzed using lean process methodologies) were evaluated. RESULTS: Data analysis indicated that use of the IV gravimetric TAWF system was associated with a significantly lower percentage of accuracy errors compared to the IV robotics system (1.58% vs 2.47%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference in absolute precision (1.12 vs 1.12 P = 0.952). Lean analysis demonstrated that overall completion time (17:49 minutes vs 24:45 minutes) and compound preparation time (2:39 minutes vs 6:07 minutes) were less with the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotics system. CONCLUSION: Implementation of either an IV gravimetric TAWF system or IV robotics system will result in similar compounding accuracy and precision. Preparation time was less with use of the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotic system, but the IV robotic system required less human intervention. Both systems ensure medication safety for patients, although the IV robotic system has increased safeguards in place. Therefore, the primary driver for implementing these systems is alternative factors such as cost of systems implementation and maintenance, employee safety, and drug waste.