ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Prescribing errors occur in up to 15% of UK inpatient medication orders. However, junior doctors report insufficient feedback on errors. A barrier preventing feedback is that individual prescribers often cannot be clearly identified on prescribing documentation. AIM: To reduce prescribing errors in a UK hospital by improving feedback on prescribing errors. INTERVENTIONS: We developed three linked interventions using plan-do-study-act cycles: (1) name stamps for junior doctors who were encouraged to stamp or write their name clearly when prescribing; (2) principles of effective feedback to support pharmacists to provide feedback to doctors on individual prescribing errors and (3) fortnightly prescribing advice emails that addressed a common and/or serious error. IMPLEMENTATION AND EVALUATION: Interventions were introduced at one hospital site in August 2013 with a second acting as control. Process measures included the percentage of inpatient medication orders for which junior doctors stated their name. Outcome measures were junior doctors' and pharmacists' perceptions of current feedback provision (evaluated using quantitative pre-questionnaires and post-questionnaires and qualitative focus groups) and the prevalence of erroneous medication orders written by junior doctors between August and December 2013. RESULTS: The percentage of medication orders for which junior doctors stated their name increased from about 10% to 50%. Questionnaire responses revealed a significant improvement in pharmacists' perceptions but no significant change for doctors. Focus group findings suggested increased doctor engagement with safe prescribing. Interrupted time series analysis showed no difference in weekly prescribing error rates between baseline and intervention periods, compared with the control site. CONCLUSION: Findings suggest improved experiences around feedback. However, attempts to produce a measurable reduction in prescribing errors are likely to need a multifaceted approach of which feedback should form part.
Subject(s)
Drug Prescriptions/standards , Formative Feedback , Medical Staff, Hospital , Quality Improvement , Humans , Medication Errors/prevention & control , Practice Patterns, Physicians' , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
Background Several clinical pharmacy activities are common to UK hospitals. It is not clear whether these are provided at similar levels, and whether they take similar amounts of time to carry out. Objective To quantify and compare clinical pharmacist ward activities between different UK hospitals. Setting Seven acute hospitals in the Greater London area (UK). Methods A list of common ward activities was developed. On five consecutive days, pharmacists visiting hospital wards documented total time spent and how many of each activity they undertook. Results were analysed by hospital. The range and number of activities per 100 occupied bed days, and per 24 beds were compared. Main outcome measure Time spent on wards and numbers of each activity undertaken. Results Pharmacists logged a total of 2291 h carrying out 40,000 activities. 4250 changes to prescriptions were made or recommended. 5901 individual medication orders were annotated for clarity or safety. For every 24 beds visited, mean time spent was 230 min-seeing 6.2 new patients, carrying out 3.9 calculations and 1.3 patient consultations, checking and authorising 1.8 discharge prescriptions, and providing staff with information twice. Other activities varied significantly, not all could be explained by differences in hospital specialties or Information Technology systems. Conclusion This is the first detailed comparison of clinical pharmacy ward activities between different hospitals. There are some typical levels of activities carried out. Wide variations in other activities could not always be explained. Despite a large number of contacts, pharmacists reported very few consultation sessions with patients.
