[Medication errors in two Brazilian hospitals]. / Errores de medicación de dos hospitales de Brasil.

OBJECTIVE: To determine medication errors in a public and in a private hospital. METHOD: Cross-sectional. 638 dosis opportunities for errors (administered dosis + omitted dosis) were assessed in January, 2005. Medication error was defined as any given dose different from a legible prescription on patient chart. The error rate was calculated by the following equation: number of dosis/error opportunities. The errors were classified according to the categories: omission, unordered dose, extra-dose, wrong dose, wrong route, wrong form, wrong time. RESULTS: Out of 638 opportunities of error, 209 (32,9%) were wrong in some way. When wrong time errors were excluded, this rate decreased to 156 (25%). The most frequent types of errors were omission and unordered dosis, 67 (10,5%) and 65 (10,2%), respectively. There was no significant difference on the total error rate according to the type of hospital (public or private). CONCLUSIONS: The public hospital showed a double-fold unordered dose error rate as compared to the private hospital. Inversely, the private hospital showed a double-fold wrong time error rate than the public hospital.

[Drug-related clinical research--a practical opportunity for the hospital pharmacist]. / La investigación clínica con medicamentos: una oportunidad práctica para el farmacéutico hospitalario.

OBJECTIVE: To describe a pharmacist s field of activity in drug-related clinical trials. METHOD: A non-systematic assessment of available scientific literature in international databases queried during the period of May 05 to 31, 2005. RESULTS: In all, 36 papers were obtained regarding the role of hospital pharmacists in the development of drug-related clinical trials. Most common activities included dispensation, storage, and inventory. Participation in ethics committees and study coordination represent an expanding area. CONCLUSIONS: Drug-related clinical research is an excellent practical setting for the hospital pharmacist. Activities related to investigational drug control, including dispensation, randomization scheme management, and patient follow-up, are an example. This is a novel though rapidly expanding scenario in Brazil.

Validation of criteria for nosocomial use of amikacin in Brazil with the Delphi technique

The Delphi technique has been used since the 1950s to collect the opinions of experts; to gauge their indications, and in some instances, to develop a consensus. This systematic collection and aggregation of informed judgments from a group of experts on specific questions or issues is a highly efficient and cost-effective means to establish guidelines and policies, when compared to other strategies, such as committee meetings or personal interviews. OBJECTIVE: Examine the content validation process of the proposed criteria of the American Society of Health System Pharmacists (ASHP) for amikacin use in hospital settings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Delphi technique was applied using the proposed ASHP criteria questionnaire containing 102 specific questions related to the nosocomial use of amikacin by individual patients. The questionnaire contained six groups of questions: 1) Identification and basic demographic data, 2) Relevant data for the use of amikacin, 3) Justification of its usage, 4) Critical parameters of amikacin use, 5) Complications, 6) Measurement of results. Eight hospital specialist medical doctors were selected, including five in the area of infectious diseases, one surgeon, one nephrologist and one in critical care medicine. The questionnaire was e-mailed to the doctors and they were asked for their opinion about the appropriateness of the questions. They were to say whether the general concept seemed totally or partially adequate to the proposed process, what grade (0 to 10) they would give to each section, and if there were any perceived deficiencies, they could add, omit or modify individual questions. A second questionnaire containing the questions for which there had been no consensus based on the answers to the previous one was re-sent to the participants for consolidation. RESULTS: Feedback revealed an agreement of 75 percent concerning the utility and appropriateness of sections 1 and 2. The section about the justification of amikacin usage was agreed on by 50 percent. There was a total agreement of 62 percent for the critical parameters of amikacin use, and a partial agreement of 37 percent. The complication of usage of the questionnaire was agreed upon by 50 percent of the participants, and positive measurement of the results was totally agreed on by 62 percent, and partially by 37 percent. The overall score for the questionnaire was 8.77 ± 0.25. CONCLUSION: The usage criteria for amikacin recommended by ASHP were validated by the Delphi technique for utilization in Brazilian hospital settings. The Delphi technique applied to validate a questionnaire instrument for monitoring the correct use of a specific strategic antibiotic indicated for the treatment and prophylaxis of serious antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, proved to be a reliable and simple tool for designing guidelines and a consensus document for hospital use of antibiotics.

Validation of criteria for nosocomial use of amikacin in Brazil with the Delphi technique.

UNLABELLED: The Delphi technique has been used since the 1950s to collect the opinions of experts; to gauge their indications, and in some instances, to develop a consensus. This systematic collection and aggregation of informed judgments from a group of experts on specific questions or issues is a highly efficient and cost-effective means to establish guidelines and policies, when compared to other strategies, such as committee meetings or personal interviews. OBJECTIVE: Examine the content validation process of the proposed criteria of the American Society of Health System Pharmacists (ASHP) for amikacin use in hospital settings. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The Delphi technique was applied using the proposed ASHP criteria questionnaire containing 102 specific questions related to the nosocomial use of amikacin by individual patients. The questionnaire contained six groups of questions: 1) Identification and basic demographic data, 2) Relevant data for the use of amikacin, 3) Justification of its usage, 4) Critical parameters of amikacin use, 5) Complications, 6) Measurement of results. Eight hospital specialist medical doctors were selected, including five in the area of infectious diseases, one surgeon, one nephrologist and one in critical care medicine. The questionnaire was e-mailed to the doctors and they were asked for their opinion about the appropriateness of the questions. They were to say whether the general concept seemed totally or partially adequate to the proposed process, what grade (0 to 10) they would give to each section, and if there were any perceived deficiencies, they could add, omit or modify individual questions. A second questionnaire containing the questions for which there had been no consensus based on the answers to the previous one was re-sent to the participants for consolidation. RESULTS: Feedback revealed an agreement of 75% concerning the utility and appropriateness of sections 1 and 2. The section about the justification of amikacin usage was agreed on by 50%. There was a total agreement of 62% for the critical parameters of amikacin use, and a partial agreement of 37%. The complication of usage of the questionnaire was agreed upon by 50% of the participants, and positive measurement of the results was totally agreed on by 62%, and partially by 37%. The overall score for the questionnaire was 8.77 +/- 0.25. CONCLUSION: The usage criteria for amikacin recommended by ASHP were validated by the Delphi technique for utilization in Brazilian hospital settings. The Delphi technique applied to validate a questionnaire instrument for monitoring the correct use of a specific strategic antibiotic indicated for the treatment and prophylaxis of serious antibiotic-resistant Gram-negative bacteria, proved to be a reliable and simple tool for designing guidelines and a consensus document for hospital use of antibiotics.