Pediatric iron preparations for infants in Bahrain: some therapeutic concerns.

BACKGROUND: Infants and children are at a high risk for medication errors. OBJECTIVES: This retrospective study was conducted to determine the type and prevalence of prescribing errors related to pediatric iron preparations prescribed in primary care in Bahrain. METHODS: Prescriptions issued for infants and collected at 20 health center pharmacies for 2 weeks were audited, specifically for errors. RESULTS: Of 2,282 prescriptions dispensed for infants (mean age 9.14 +/- 0.91 months), 159 (7.0%) included an iron preparation. Iron preparations were mostly prescribed (90.6%) with brand names, several of which were neither listed in the primary care drug list nor were available as pediatric dosage forms. 42 (26.4%) prescriptions were issued without specifying the dosage forms, 14 (8.8%) without the duration of therapy and 4 (2.5%) without dosage. Iron dosage was stated as metric volume (ml) and metric weight (mg elemental iron) units in 78.6% and 9.4% of the prescriptions, respectively. The mean elemental iron (+/- SD) prescribed for treating anemia was 4.5 +/- 1.7 mg/kg body weight. A significant difference was observed between physicians and nurses regarding the amount of elemental iron prescribed for treating anemia. CONCLUSIONS: Prescribing of multiple brands of pediatric iron preparations unavailable in the primary care drug list and in pediatric dosage forms, prescribing iron as inconvenient decimal fractions (metric volume units), and omission errors in prescriptions, were common. This may be related to poor communications between the prescribers and the pharmacy services and a lack of information dissemination on newly introduced iron formulations. Moreover, frequent changes in brand availability in primary care may have created confusion for prescribers. The communication between pharmacy services and prescribers should be strengthened, and the procurement of multiple brands should be discouraged. A better management of drug supply and effective policies to minimize prescribing errors are needed in Bahrain.

Analysis of drug prescriptions in primary health care centres in Bahrain

The aim of this study was to analyse drug prescribing practices in primary health care centres in Bahrain. We retrospectively evaluated 600 prescriptions selected randomly from all primary health care centres in Bahrain [n = 20] in 2004. Analysis followed WHO recommended prescribing core indicators. The mean number of drugs prescribed at each encounter was 3.3 [SD 0.7]. A single drug was prescribed on 6.3% of prescriptions and drugs were prescribed by generic name on 10.2%. The percentage of total prescriptions for antibiotics was 45.8%, for injections was 9.3% and for vitamins was 12.5%. The prescribing pattern in primary health care centres in Bahrain is associated with polypharmacy, over-prescribing of antibiotics and an under-prescribing of drugs by generic names

Prescription writing skills of residents in a family practice residency programme in Bahrain.

PURPOSE OF THE STUDY: To evaluate the prescription writing skill of final year residents in a family practice residency programme (FPRP) in Bahrain, and to compare skill of residents who have graduated from medical schools with problem based learning (PBL) versus traditional (non-PBL) curricula. STUDY DESIGN: Prescriptions issued by the residents were prospectively collected for two consecutive cohorts in May 2004 and May 2005. Prescription errors were classified as errors of omission (minor and major), commission (incorrect information) and integration (drug-drug interactions). RESULTS: In 69.6% of medications with major omission errors, dosage form (39.4%) and length of treatment (18.5%) were not specified. In 24.7% of medications with commission errors, dosing frequency (19.9%) and incorrect strength/dose (2.2%) were the most common errors. Integration errors comprised 5.7% of all prescribing errors. No significant differences were observed between PBL and non-PBL graduates with regard to the total number of prescriptions with errors, drugs per prescription, polypharmacy, and the total number of drugs with errors. The proportion of prescriptions with a potential for drug-drug interactions was comparable between PBL and non-PBL graduates. PBL graduates prescribed medications using brand names at a rate greater than non-PBL, whereas non-PBL graduates prescribed medications on inappropriate "as required" basis, and injections at a rate greater than PBL residents. CONCLUSIONS: Prescription writing skill of the final year residents in an FPRP programme was suboptimal for both PBL and non-PBL graduates. Integration of prescription writing skill and a rational pharmacotherapeutic programme into the FPRP curriculum is recommended.

An evaluation of prescribing errors in primary care in Bahrain.

OBJECTIVES: Prescribing errors are preventable and are considered an important target for improving healthcare. The aim of this study was to identify prescribing errors and their determinants in a primary care setting. METHODS: Prescriptions with errors were collected on a daily basis by the pharmacy staff during the first two weeks of September 2003 in 18 out of 20 primary care health centers in Bahrain. Prescribing errors were classified as omission (minor and major), commission and integration errors. RESULTS: Out of 77,511 prescriptions dispensed, 5,959 (7.7%) were identified to contain errors. The frequency of prescribed medication items in 5,959 prescriptions was 16,091. Of these medications, 13,630 (84.7%) were with errors and only 13.2% were written using generic names. Minor errors of omission such as absence of physician's stamp (34.4%), date (9.8%), and information about patients' address (3.8%), age (3.5%) and sex (0.5%) were not specified. Major errors of omission accounted for 93.6% and were as follows: strength/dose (31.0%), length of therapy/ quantity (29.5%), dosage form (19.7%), and frequency of dosing (13.4%). In 6.3% errors of commission (incorrect information) the most common was strength/dose (3.3%), followed by frequency of dosing (2.6%), dosage form (0.3%), and length of therapy/quantity (0.1%). Major errors of omission associated with topical preparations were significantly higher than those with systemic preparations. However, prescriptions with systemic preparations had a higher rate of commission errors. Significant differences in errors were found in prescriptions ordered by family physicians and general practitioners. In 9.2% of prescriptions with errors, potential drug-drug interactions were expected. CONCLUSIONS: This nationwide survey revealed that in primary care, a considerable proportion of prescriptions contained errors. Strategies to minimize medication errors by improving the prescribing skills, adherence to essential drugs list, and use of National Formulary are needed.