Medication errors: a baseline survey of dispensing errors reported in community pharmacies

2002 ◽  
Vol 10 (S1) ◽  
pp. R68-R68 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. Quinlan ◽  
D. M. Ashcroft ◽  
A. Blenkinsopp
2020 ◽  
pp. 1357633X2096434 ◽  
Author(s):  
Osama M Ibrahim ◽  
Rana M Ibrahim ◽  
Ahmad Z Al Meslamani ◽  
Nadia Al Mazrouei

Introduction Remote pharmacist interventions have achieved much more attention during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outbreak, since they reduce the risk of transmission and can potentially increase the access of vulnerable populations, such as patients with COVID-19, to pharmaceutical care. This study aimed to examine differences in rates and types of pharmacist interventions related to COVID-19 and medication dispensing errors (MDEs) across community pharmacies with and without telepharmacy services. Methods This was a prospective, disguised, observational study conducted over four months (from March 2020 to July 2020) in 52 community pharmacies (26 with and 26 without telepharmacy) across all seven states of the United Arab Emirates using proportionate random sampling. A standardised data-collection form was developed to include information about patient status, pharmacist interventions and MDEs. Results The test (telepharmacy) group pharmacies provided pharmaceutical care to 19,974 patients, of whom 6371 (31.90%) and 1213 (6.07%) were probable and confirmed cases of COVID-19, respectively. The control group pharmacies provided care to 9151 patients, of whom 1074 (11.74%) and 33 (0.36%) were probable and confirmed cases of COVID-19, respectively. Rates of MDEs and their subcategories, prescription-related errors and pharmacist counselling errors across pharmacies with telepharmacy versus those without remote services were 15.81% versus 19.43% ( p < 0.05), 5.38% versus 10.08% ( p < 0.05) and 10.42% versus 9.35% ( p > 0.05), respectively. Discussion This is one of the first studies to provide high-quality evidence of the impact of telepharmacy on COVID-19 patients’ access to pharmaceutical care and on medication dispensing safety.


2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (5) ◽  
pp. 480-484
Author(s):  
Nancy L. Borja-Hart ◽  
Maria Maniscalco-Feichtl

Objective: To identify whether community pharmacies are collecting the minimum patient information mandated by the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990 (OBRA’90), and to create an intake form that meets and exceeds these requirements. Methods: Chain, mass merchandiser, supermarket, and wholesale pharmacies located within the state of Florida were eligible for selection. Only 1 pharmacy was selected from each company. The research assistant asked the pharmacy employee to describe all information requested from a patient who is bringing in a prescription for the first time and/ or provide a blank copy of their existing patient intake form. Patient intake information forms were collected between July 2008 and February 2009. Results: Of the 10 pharmacies included in this study (3 supermarkets, 3 mass merchandisers, 2 wholesale pharmacies, and 2 chain pharmacies), 40% of the studied pharmacies collected information on patient medications. All pharmacies collected at least 6 information requirements. Only 1 pharmacy was compliant with OBRA’90 requirements evaluated. Conclusion: By obtaining this information providers are in a better position to assist with avoiding medication errors and to help with the medical reconciliation process in health systems.


2014 ◽  
Vol 23 (8) ◽  
pp. 629-638 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bryony Dean Franklin ◽  
Matthew Reynolds ◽  
Stacey Sadler ◽  
Ralph Hibberd ◽  
Anthony J Avery ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 4197-4197
Author(s):  
Radha Rohatgi ◽  
Sadhna Shankar

Abstract Abstract 4197 Medication errors are responsible for 98,000 deaths and over almost a million injuries every year according to the Institute of Medicine report published in 1999. Cancer patients often receive complicated chemotherapy regimens which are at risk for errors. Few studies have evaluated the risk of medication errors related to chemotherapy. Majority of these studies are related to adult cancer patients. Studies regarding chemotherapy errors in pediatric patients are limited. The goal of this study was to evaluate the type and severity of errors related to chemotherapy administration in the pediatric oncology inpatient unit and outpatient clinic at a single institution over a 24 month period using a voluntary error reporting system in the institution. WebEnvision is a voluntary electronic reporting system implemented in 2007, that allows staff to anonymously report patient or staff safety incidents. We evaluated all the chemotherapy related WebEnvision reports from June 1, 2009 to May 31, 2011. All reports related to prescribing, dispensing and administering chemotherapy medications were included. Reports related to a supportive care measures were excluded. The reports were reviewed by both authors and graded according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention Index for medication errors. The errors were also classified by type as defined by the American Society of Hospital Pharmacists guidelines for preventing medication errors. A total of 1030 reports related to oncology patients were recorded during the study period. Of these, 246 (23.9%) were related to chemotherapy. Thirty nine thousand preparations were dispensed by the chemotherapy pharmacy during the study period. The median number of chemotherapy drugs on orders associated with an error was 2 with a range of 1 to 6. The median length of chemotherapy treatment per order was 3 days with a range of 1 to 56 days. Approximately half (47%) of the errors occurred in patients undergoing treatment for leukemia or lymphoma, 28% for solid tumors, 17% for brain tumors, and 7% for non-malignant hematology patients. Ninety four (38%) errors were attributed to pharmacy, 83 (34%) to the providers, and 51 (20%) to the nurses. Seventy six (31%) were prescribing errors, 41 (16%) were administration errors, 31 (13%) were dispensing errors, and 26 (11%) were transcription errors. Approximately half (44%) of errors were of category B, an error occurred but did not reach the patient. Seventy six (31%) reports were category A, circumstances for error were present but no error occurred. Fifty nine (24%) were category C, an error reached the patient but caused no harm. Three errors reached the patient and could have contributed to harm (category D, F,G). Approximately one in three dispensing errors (32%), one in six prescribing errors (17%) and one in ten (11%) transcription errors reached the patient. Prescribing errors were the most common chemotherapy related errors in this study. One in four of all errors reached the patients. Errors occurred despite an institutional policy of two independent checks by providers, pharmacists, and nurses. More diligence is necessary on part of the person performing the second check on chemotherapy orders. Computerized provider order entry may help reduce chemotherapy related errors. Table1. Types of chemotherapy related errors Types of Errors N (%) Prescribing 76 (31) Delay 58 (23) Administration 41 (16) Dispensing 31 (13) Transcription 26 (11) Monitoring 7 (3) Compliance 4 (2) Omission 3 (1) Total 246 (100) Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2011 ◽  
Vol 68 (2) ◽  
pp. 158-163 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas T. Moniz ◽  
Andrew C. Seger ◽  
Carol A. Keohane ◽  
Dianel Lew Seger ◽  
David W. Bates ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Yaser Mohammed Al-worafi

Objective: The objective of this study was to determine the dispensing errors, its types, and causes in community pharmacies in Ibb, Yemen.Methods: A prospective study was conducted among community pharmacies in the Ibb, Yemen, over 4 months’ period. Dispensing errors that were detected during the dispensing process were recorded by the pharmacy dispensers using a data collection form. Detecting and reporting of dispensing errors, types, and causes of dispensing errors were explained to the participated pharmacists before starting the study. The data were analyzed using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences® (IBM SPSS) version 21 for Windows.Results: A total of 35 (0.80%) dispensing errors were reported in this study. Wrong dosage form was the most common dispensing error type reported in this study followed by wrong quantity, wrong strength, and wrong drug. Factors most commonly reported as contributing to dispensing errors in this study were prescriptions poor handwriting, similar medications packaging, more than one patient at the same time, and similar drug names.Conclusion: This study explored the type and causes of dispensing errors at five community pharmacies in the Ibb city, Yemen. Dispensing errors can be prevented by educational interventions about dispensing error’s and its potential causes. Effective collaboration and communication between community pharmacy dispensers and prescribers are an important key to minimize and prevent dispensing errors.


Pulse ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 41-47
Author(s):  
A Mahmud ◽  
F Noor ◽  
M Nasrullah

Apollo Hospitals Dhaka surely stepped ahead than any other hospital of Bangladesh for reducing medication errors significantly. From the very beginning of its establishment, reducing medication errors was taken as a major challenge and effective and approved strategies were developed when no other hospital took efforts in this regard. Strategies included tracking incidents of medication errors, analyzing, reporting & arranging proper training sessions for hospital staffs etc. All four types of errors like Prescription errors, Transcription errors, Dispensing errors and Administration errors are rectified and officially reported by hospital pharmacists. Along with these, Prescription Reviewing, Medication Reconciliation, incidents of Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) are also monitored to ensure rational drug use for patients. With all its efforts, Apollo Hospitals Dhaka was able to reduce the rate of medication errors within the internationally acceptable range. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3329/pulse.v5i2.20265 Pulse Vol.5 July 2011 p.41-47


2016 ◽  
Vol 73 (15) ◽  
pp. 1167-1173 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gary L. Cochran ◽  
Ryan S. Barrett ◽  
Susan D. Horn

Abstract Purpose The role of pharmacist transcription, onsite pharmacist dispensing, use of automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs), nurse–nurse double checks, or barcode-assisted medication administration (BCMA) in reducing medication error rates in critical access hospitals (CAHs) was evaluated. Methods Investigators used the practice-based evidence methodology to identify predictors of medication errors in 12 Nebraska CAHs. Detailed information about each medication administered was recorded through direct observation. Errors were identified by comparing the observed medication administered with the physician’s order. Chi-square analysis and Fisher’s exact test were used to measure differences between groups of medication-dispensing procedures. Results Nurses observed 6497 medications being administered to 1374 patients. The overall error rate was 1.2%. The transcription error rates for orders transcribed by an onsite pharmacist were slightly lower than for orders transcribed by a telepharmacy service (0.10% and 0.33%, respectively). Fewer dispensing errors occurred when medications were dispensed by an onsite pharmacist versus any other method of medication acquisition (0.10% versus 0.44%, p = 0.0085). The rates of dispensing errors for medications that were retrieved from a single-cell ADC (0.19%), a multicell ADC (0.45%), or a drug closet or general supply (0.77%) did not differ significantly. BCMA was associated with a higher proportion of dispensing and administration errors intercepted before reaching the patient (66.7%) compared with either manual double checks (10%) or no BCMA or double check (30.4%) of the medication before administration (p = 0.0167). Conclusion Onsite pharmacist dispensing and BCMA were associated with fewer medication errors and are important components of a medication safety strategy in CAHs.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document