Incidence of Intravenous Medication Errors in a Chinese Hospital.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to explore intravenous (IV) medication errors in a Chinese hospital. The specific objectives were to 1) explore and measure the frequency of IV medication errors by direct observation and identify clues to their causes in Chinese hospital inpatient wards and 2) identify the clinical importance of the errors and find the potential risks in the preparation and administration processes of IV medications. METHODS: A prospective study was conducted by using the direct observational method to describe IV medication errors on two general surgery patient wards in a large teaching hospital in Beijing, China. A trained observer accompanied nurses during IV preparation rounds to detect medication errors. The difference in mean error rates between total parenteral nutrition (TPN) and non-TPN medications was tested by using the Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: A final total of 589 ordered IV doses plus 4 unordered IV doses as prepared and administered to the patients was observed from August 3, 2010, to August 13, 2010. The overall error rate detected on the study ward was 12.8%. The most frequent errors by category were wrong dose (5.4%), wrong time (3.7%), omission (2.7%), unordered dose (0.7%), and extra dose (0.3%). Excluding wrong time errors, the error rate was 9.1%. Non-TPN medications had significantly higher error rates than did TPN medications including wrong time errors (P = 0.0162). CONCLUSIONS: A typical inpatient in a Chinese hospital was subject to about one IV error every day. Pharmacists had a very limited role in ensuring the accuracy of IV medication preparation and administration processes.

Dispensing errors and counseling quality in 100 pharmacies.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the dispensing accuracy and counseling provided in community chain pharmacies. DESIGN: Cross-sectional study. SETTING: Community chain pharmacies in large metropolitan areas of Florida, Georgia, New Jersey, and New York. PARTICIPANTS: Community chain pharmacies and trained shoppers. INTERVENTIONS: Trained shoppers presented a new prescription order for one of five study drugs to each randomly selected pharmacy, and all encounters with pharmacy staff were recorded on video by ABC News 20/20 staff using hidden cameras. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Dispensing errors on prescriptions for selected medications were the indicator of prescription dispensing accuracy. Frequency of verbal counseling and information categories discussed or included in written information were used to assess the quality of counseling. RESULTS: Of 100 prescriptions dispensed, 22 had one or more deviation from the physician's written order, for a 22% dispensing error rate. Three of the errors were judged to be potentially harmful when dispensed to a typical patient requiring these therapies. A total of 43 shoppers (43%) received verbal counseling, including 16 cases in which the shopper prompted counseling. All shoppers received written information with their prescription, covering an average of 90% of the required topics. Some 68% of the warfarin shoppers purchased aspirin without the pharmacist verbally warning about taking the drugs simultaneously. CONCLUSION: The dispensing error rate of more than one in five prescriptions is similar to the rate found in a similar study conducted 14 years ago, but counseling frequency has decreased significantly during the period.

Comparison of two error-detection methods in a mail service pharmacy serving health facilities.

OBJECTIVES: To compare two dispensing error-detection methods in a mail service pharmacy and explore clues to the causes of near errors. DESIGN: Descriptive and exploratory study. SETTING: Mail service pharmacy serving health facilities, April 5-9, 2004. PARTICIPANTS: Technicians, pharmacists at a mail service pharmacy; nurses at health facilities served. INTERVENTION: Blinded, undisguised observation of prescription orders at a mail service pharmacy by a research pharmacist and student pharmacist. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Prescription dispensing errors detected by pharmacist audit compared with errors reported by nurses at the health facilities served. RESULTS: Of the 3,337 prescription orders sampled, 16 (0.48%) contained one or more errors based on the observers' assessment and no errors were reported by nurses for these medications using incident reports. Error types detected by observation were compared with the data from incident reports for the 3 previous years. Extrapolating the findings of the observational study and comparing those data with the incident reports, significant differences were found for total dispensing errors, wrong strength errors, wrong dosage form errors, and wrong label instruction errors. Errors related to wrong drug were not significantly different between the observational and incidentreporting data. In observations of pharmacists at work in the mail-service pharmacy, proximity of look-alike/sound-alike drugs on storage shelves and inadequate lighting were potential causes of near errors. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist assessment of prescription orders detects more dispensing errors than nurse-based incident reports. The study identified clues to the causes of near errors occurring in a mail service pharmacy.

Geometric probability distribution for modeling of error risk during prescription dispensing.

PURPOSE: The relationship between the number of prescriptions dispensed by individual pharmacy staff during a single workday and the probability of committing at least one dispensing error during that same workday period was evaluated using a geometric probability distribution. SUMMARY: A cross-sectional descriptive study involving 50 pharmacies located in six cities across the United States was conducted. A pharmacist trained to detect dispensing errors recorded the number of prescriptions filled by each pharmacy staff member and noted which prescription represented the staff member's first dispensing error (defined as any deviation from the prescriber's order) made during the observation period. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests for discrete distributions revealed that the observed cumulative distribution of dispensing errors could have come from a geometric probability distribution that assumed dispensing error rates of 2-3%. In terms of risk analysis, this study's findings suggest that there can be a quantifiable statistical relationship between a measure of workload and the risk of committing at least one dispensing error. The ability to model dispensing errors using a geometric probability distribution enables the safety and health care practitioner to directly assess dispensing error risk as a function of a pharmacy's accuracy rate and the number of prescriptions a pharmacy staff member should dispense during a work shift. CONCLUSION: A geometric probability distribution effectively modeled the relationship between the number of prescriptions filled and the occurrence of the first dispensing errors.

Patient decision making: strategies for diabetes diet adherence intervention.

BACKGROUND: Patient self-care is critical in controlling diabetes and its complications. Lack of diet adherence is a particular challenge to effective diabetes intervention. The Transtheoretical Model (TTM) of Change, decision-making theory, and self-efficacy have contributed to successful tailoring of interventions in many target behaviors. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop a diagnostic tool, including TTM measures for the stages of change, decisional balance, and self-efficacy, that pharmacists involved in diabetes intervention can use for patients resistant to a diet regimen. METHODS: A questionnaire was developed through a literature review, interviews with diabetic patients, an expert panel input, and pretesting. Cross-sectional implementation of the questionnaire among a convenience sample of 193 type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients took place at 4 patient care sites throughout the southeastern United States. Validated measures were used to collect respondent self-report for the TTM variables and for demographic and diabetes history variables. Social desirability was also assessed. RESULTS: Relationships among TTM measures for diet adherence generally replicated those established for other target behaviors. Salient items were identified as potential facilitators (decisional balance pros) or barriers (decisional balance cons and self-efficacy tempting situations) to change. Social desirability exhibited a statistically significant relationship with patient report of diet adherence, with statistically significant differences in mean social desirability across race categories. CONCLUSIONS: The TTM measures for the stages of change, decisional balance, and self-efficacy are useful for making decisions on individually tailored interventions for diet adherence, with caution asserted about the potential of diabetes patients to self-report the target behavior in a socially desirable manner. Future research directions, implications, and limitations of the findings are also presented.

National observational study of prescription dispensing accuracy and safety in 50 pharmacies.

OBJECTIVES: To measure dispensing accuracy rates in 50 pharmacies located in 6 cities across the United States and describe the nature and frequency of the errors detected. DESIGN: Cross-sectional descriptive study. SETTINGS: Chain, independent, and health-system pharmacies (located in hospitals or managed care organizations). PARTICIPANTS: Pharmacy staff at randomly selected pharmacies in each city who accepted an invitation to participate. INTERVENTION: Observation by a pharmacist in each pharmacy for 1 day, with a goal of inspecting 100 prescriptions for dispensing errors (defined as any deviation from the prescriber's order). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Dispensing errors on new and refill prescriptions. RESULTS: Data were collected between July 2000 and April 2001. The overall dispensing accuracy rate was 98.3% (77 errors among 4,481 prescriptions; range, 87.2%-100.0%; 95.0% confidence interval, +/- 0.4%). Accuracy rates did not differ significantly by pharmacy type or city. Of the 77 identified errors, 5 (6.5%) were judged to be clinically important. CONCLUSION: Dispensing errors are a problem on a national level, at a rate of about 4 errors per day in a pharmacy filling 250 prescriptions daily. An estimated 51.5 million errors occur during the filling of 3 billion prescriptions each year.

Medication errors observed in 36 health care facilities.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a national concern. OBJECTIVE: To identify the prevalence of medication errors (doses administered differently than ordered). DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: Hospitals accredited by the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, nonaccredited hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities in Georgia and Colorado. PARTICIPANTS: A stratified random sample of 36 institutions. Twenty-six declined, with random replacement. Medication doses given (or omitted) during at least 1 medication pass during a 1- to 4-day period by nurses on high medication-volume nursing units. The target sample was 50 day-shift doses per nursing unit or until all doses for that medication pass were administered. METHODS: Medication errors were witnessed by observation, and verified by a research pharmacist (E.A.F.). Clinical significance was judged by an expert panel of physicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Medication errors reaching patients. RESULTS: In the 36 institutions, 19% of the doses (605/3216) were in error. The most frequent errors by category were wrong time (43%), omission (30%), wrong dose (17%), and unauthorized drug (4%). Seven percent of the errors were judged potential adverse drug events. There was no significant difference between error rates in the 3 settings (P =.82) or by size (P =.39). Error rates were higher in Colorado than in Georgia (P =.04) CONCLUSIONS: Medication errors were common (nearly 1 of every 5 doses in the typical hospital and skilled nursing facility). The percentage of errors rated potentially harmful was 7%, or more than 40 per day in a typical 300-patient facility. The problem of defective medication administration systems, although varied, is widespread.

Comparison of methods for detecting medication errors in 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities.

The validity and cost-effectiveness of three methods for detecting medication errors were examined. A stratified random sample of 36 hospitals and skilled-nursing facilities in Colorado and Georgia was selected. Medication administration errors were detected by registered nurses (R.N.s), licensed practical nurses (L.P.N.s), and pharmacy technicians from these facilities using three methods: incident report review, chart review, and direct observation. Each dose evaluated was compared with the prescriber's order. Deviations were considered errors. Efficiency was measured by the time spent evaluating each dose. A pharmacist performed an independent determination of errors to assess the accuracy of each data collector. Clinical significance was judged by a panel of physicians. Observers detected 300 of 457 pharmacist-confirmed errors made on 2556 doses (11.7% error rate) compared with 17 errors detected by chart reviewers (0.7% error rate), and 1 error detected by incident report review (0.04% error rate). All errors detected involved the same 2556 doses. All chart reviewers and 7 of 10 observers achieved at least good comparability with the pharmacist's results. The mean cost of error detection per dose was $4.82 for direct observation and $0.63 for chart review. The technician was the least expensive observer at $2.87 per dose evaluated. R.N.s were the least expensive chart reviewers at $0.50 per dose. Of 457 errors, 35 (8%) were deemed potentially clinically significant; 71% of these were detected by direct observation. Direct observation was more efficient and accurate than reviewing charts and incident reports in detecting medication errors. Pharmacy technicians were more efficient and accurate than R.N.s and L.P.N.s in collecting data about medication errors.