Pengaruh Implementasi Pelayanan Farmasi Klinis Terhadap Medication Error di RSUD Pariaman

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 71
Author(s):  
Intan Kumalasari
Keyword(s):  

Insiden medication error biasanya tidak diketahui secara langsung karena sering diibaratkan dengan fenomena gunung es. Dengan adanya pelayanan farmasi klinis diharapkan medication error bisa diketahui sebelum mencapai pasien. Kebanyakan kasus medication error yang diakibatkan oleh penggunaan obat, medication error baru dilaporkan setelah terjadinya efek yang tidak diharapkan dari pemakaian obat. Tujuan penelitian ini adalah untuk mengetahui implementasi pelaksanaan dan peran pelayanan farmasi klinis dalam mencegah dan memonitoring medication error di RSUD Pariaman. Metode penelitian dilakukan secara kualitatif dengan melakukan observasi dan wawancara mengenai pelayanan farmasi klinis yang dilakukan oleh apoteker terhadap pasien rawat inap di RSUD Pariaman. Dari penelitian ini diperoleh hasil bahwa penerapan pelayanan farmasi klinis di RSUD Pariaman belum optimal sehingga belum mempunyai pengaruh yang significan dalam mengatasi medication error. Disarankan agar RSUD Pariaman melengkapi sarana dan prasaranan termasuk regulasi dan dokumen yang dibutuhkan dalam menunjang kegiatan pelayanan farmasi klinis. Serta diharapkan adanya monitoring dan evaluasi terhadap pelayanan farmasi klinis secara berkala sehingga dapat meningkatkan kesejahteraan hidup pasien, peran apoteker, dan mutu rumah sakit.

Author(s):  
Fatima Almousa ◽  
Haya Alhaqbani ◽  
Rima lsagga ◽  
Abrar Alshehri ◽  
Ibrahim Alsarra

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bintang Marsondang Rambe

Latar Belakang Keselamatan pasien (patient safety) rumah sakit adalah suatu sistem dimana rumah sakit membuat asuhan pasien lebih aman yang meliputi assessment risiko, identifikasi dan pengelolaan hal yang berhubungan dengan risiko pasien, pelaporan dan analisis insiden, kemampuan belajar dari insiden dan tindak lanjutnya serta implementasi solusi untuk meminimalkan timbulnya risiko dan mencegah terjadinya cedera yang disebabkan oleh kesalahan akibat melaksanakan suatu tindakan atau tidak mengambil tindakan yang seharusnya diambil yang dilakukan oleh perawat (Kemenkes, 2011).Salah satu kesalahan yang dapat merugikan pasien adalah medication error. Menurut WHO (2016) medication error adalah setiap kejadian yang dapat dicegah yang menyebabkan penggunaan obat yang tidak tepat yang menyebabkan bahaya kepasien, dimana obat berada dalam kendali profesional perawatan kesehatan. proses terjadi medication error dimulai dari tahap prescribing, transcribing, dispensing,dan administration. Kesalahan peresepan (prescribing error), kesalahan penerjemahan resep (transcribing erorr), kesalahan menyiapkan dan meracik obat (dispensing erorr), dan kesalahan penyerahan obat kepada pasien (administration error). Medication error yang paling sering terjadi adalah pada fase administration / pemberian obat yang dilakukan oleh perawat.Administration error terjadi ketika pemberian obat kepada pasien tidak sesuai dengan prinsip enam benar yaitu benar obat, benar pasien, benar dosis, benar rute pemberian, benar waktu pemberian dan benar pendokumentasian. Secara global, kesalahan pemberian obat (medication errors) sampai saat ini masih menjadi isu keselamatan pasien dan kualitas pelayanan di beberapa rumah sakit (Depkes RI, 2015; AHRQ, 2015). Perawat sebagai bagian terbesar dari tenaga kesehatan di rumah sakit, mempunyai peranan dalam kejadian medication error. Perawat berkontribusi karena perawat banyak berperan dalam proses pemberian obat. Pemberian obat/ Medication Administration adalah salah satu intervensi keperawatan yang paling banyak dilakukan, dengan sekitar 5- 20% waktu perawat dialokasikan untuk kegiatan ini (Härkänen et al.,, 2019). Pemberian obat juga mencakup tugas-tugas lain, seperti menyiapkan dan memeriksa obat obatan, memantau efek obat-obatan, mengedukasi pasien tentang pengobatan, dan memperdalam pengetahuan perawat tentang obat – obatan sendiri (DrachZahavy et al., 2014 dalam Yulianti et al., 2019)Berdasarkan isu tersebut, penulis tertarik untuk melakukan literature review terkait faktor perawat dalam pelaksanakan keselamatan pasien terhadap kejadian medication administration error di Rumah Sakit.


Author(s):  
Peter J Gates ◽  
Rae-Anne Hardie ◽  
Magdalena Z Raban ◽  
Ling Li ◽  
Johanna I Westbrook

Abstract Objective To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess: 1) changes in medication error rates and associated patient harm following electronic medication system (EMS) implementation; and 2) evidence of system-related medication errors facilitated by the use of an EMS. Materials and Methods We searched Medline, Scopus, Embase, and CINAHL for studies published between January 2005 and March 2019, comparing medication errors rates with or without assessments of related harm (actual or potential) before and after EMS implementation. EMS was defined as a computer-based system enabling the prescribing, supply, and/or administration of medicines. Study quality was assessed. Results There was substantial heterogeneity in outcomes of the 18 included studies. Only 2 were strong quality. Meta-analysis of 5 studies reporting change in actual harm post-EMS showed no reduced risk (RR: 1.22, 95% CI: 0.18–8.38, P = .8) and meta-analysis of 3 studies reporting change in administration errors found a significant reduction in error rates (RR: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.72–0.83, P = .004). Of 10 studies of prescribing error rates, 9 reported a reduction but variable denominators precluded meta-analysis. Twelve studies provided specific examples of system-related medication errors; 5 quantified their occurrence. Discussion and Conclusion Despite the wide-scale adoption of EMS in hospitals around the world, the quality of evidence about their effectiveness in medication error and associated harm reduction is variable. Some confidence can be placed in the ability of systems to reduce prescribing error rates. However, much is still unknown about mechanisms which may be most effective in improving medication safety and design features which facilitate new error risks.


Author(s):  
Matthew D. Jones ◽  
Bryony Dean Franklin ◽  
D. K. Raynor ◽  
Howard Thom ◽  
Margaret C. Watson ◽  
...  

Abstract Aim In the UK, injectable medicines are often prepared and administered by nurses following the Injectable Medicines Guide (IMG). Our earlier study confirmed a higher frequency of correct administration with user-tested versus standard IMG guidelines. This current study aimed to model the cost-effectiveness of user-testing. Methods The costs and cost-effectiveness of user-testing were explored by modifying an existing probabilistic decision-analytic model. The adapted model considered administration of intravenous voriconazole to hospital inpatients by nurses. It included 11 error types, their probability of detection and level of harm. Model inputs (including costs) were derived from our previous study and other published data. Monte Carlo simulation using 20,000 samples (sufficient for convergence) was performed with a 5-year time horizon from the perspective of the 121 NHS trusts and health boards that use the IMG. Sensitivity analyses were undertaken for the risk of a medication error and other sources of uncertainty. Results The net monetary benefit at £20,000/quality-adjusted life year was £3,190,064 (95% credible interval (CrI): −346,709 to 8,480,665), favouring user-testing with a 96% chance of cost-effectiveness. Incremental cost-savings were £240,943 (95% CrI 43,527–491,576), also favouring user-tested guidelines with a 99% chance of cost-saving. The total user testing cost was £6317 (95% CrI 6012–6627). These findings were robust to assumptions about a range of input parameters, but greater uncertainty was seen with a lower medication error risk. Conclusions User-testing of injectable medicines guidelines is a low-cost intervention that is highly likely to be cost-effective, especially for high-risk medicines.


2021 ◽  
pp. 107815522199431
Author(s):  
Jennifer P Booth ◽  
Julie M Kennerly-Shah ◽  
Amber D Hartman

Introduction To describe pharmacist interventions as a result of an independent double check during cognitive order verification of outpatient parenteral anti-cancer therapy. Methods A single-center, retrospective analysis of all individual orders for outpatient, parenteral anti-cancer agents within a hematology/oncology infusion center during a 30 day period was conducted. The primary endpoint was error identification rates during first and second verification. Secondary endpoints included the type, frequency, and severity of errors identified during second verification using a modified National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention Index. Results A total of 1970 anti-cancer parenteral orders were screened, from which 1645 received an independent double check and were included. The number of errors identified during first and second verification were 30 (1.8%) and 10 (0.6%) respectively; second verification resulted in a 33.3% increase in corrected errors. The 10 errors identified during second verification included: four rate transcriptions to optimize pump interoperability, three rate and/or volume modifications, two dosage adjustments, and one treatment deferral due to toxicity. The severity was classified as Category A for four (40%), Category C for three (30%), and Category D for three (30%) errors. This correlated to a low capacity for harm for seven (70%) and a serious capacity for three (30%) errors. Conclusions Second verification of outpatient, parenteral anti-cancer medication orders resulted in a 33.3% increase in corrected errors. Three errors detected during second verification were determined to have a serious capacity for harm, supporting the value of independent double checks during pharmacist cognitive order verification.


2011 ◽  
Vol 24 (3) ◽  
pp. 238-248 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ana Belén Jiménez Muñoz ◽  
Antonio Muiño Miguez ◽  
María Paz Rodriguez Pérez ◽  
María Esther Durán Garcia ◽  
María Sanjurjo Saez

PEDIATRICS ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 138 (6) ◽  
pp. e20154413-e20154413 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Subramanyam ◽  
M. Mahmoud ◽  
D. Buck ◽  
A. Varughese

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document