Relationship between medication errors and adverse drug events

Large language models for preventing medication direction errors in online pharmacies

Errors in pharmacy medication directions, such as incorrect instructions for dosage or frequency, can increase patient safety risk substantially by raising the chances of adverse drug events. This study explores how integrating domain knowledge with large language models (LLMs)-capable of sophisticated text interpretation and generation-can reduce these errors. We introduce MEDIC (medication direction copilot), a system that emulates the reasoning of pharmacists by prioritizing precise communication of core clinical components of a prescription, such as dosage and frequency. It fine-tunes a first-generation LLM using 1,000 expert-annotated and augmented directions from Amazon Pharmacy to extract the core components and assembles them into complete directions using pharmacy logic and safety guardrails. We compared MEDIC against two LLM-based benchmarks: one leveraging 1.5 million medication directions and the other using state-of-the-art LLMs. On 1,200 expert-reviewed prescriptions, the two benchmarks respectively recorded 1.51 (confidence interval (CI) 1.03, 2.31) and 4.38 (CI 3.13, 6.64) times more near-miss events-errors caught and corrected before reaching the patient-than MEDIC. Additionally, we tested MEDIC by deploying within the production system of an online pharmacy, and during this experimental period, it reduced near-miss events by 33% (CI 26%, 40%). This study shows that LLMs, with domain expertise and safeguards, improve the accuracy and efficiency of pharmacy operations.

Reducing Discharge Medication Reconciliation Errors at a Pediatric Neurology Inpatient Unit

Background and Objectives

Medication reconciliation errors are a common problem in health care, particularly during transitions of care. Discharge medication reconciliation (DMR) errors in a pediatric setting can range from 26% to 42.2%. We conducted a quality improvement project to decrease DMR error rate at Dayton Children's Hospital in Dayton, Ohio.

Methods

We conducted 2 interventions, each with 3 Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles from September 2021 through February 2023. The first intervention focused on using current specialty neurology nurses as scribes and creating a template note to include the plan of care and review of DMR before discharge. Our second intervention consisted of standardizing the seizure rescue medication order by creating an order panel within our electronic medical record system for all the rescue medications presently available. Medication errors were documented by the specialty neurology nurse during a phone conversation on the next business day post discharge. DMR error rates were calculated for each week using a control chart. Medication errors and patient harm were classified according to the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention Index.

Results

One hundred six errors were noted. Of these, 98 (92%) occurred in patients with seizure and 64 (60%) were related to prescription of seizure rescue medication specifically. The baseline error rate was calculated at 15.7% or 7 errors per month (January 2021 through June 2021). The average error rate dropped from 15.7% to 5.3% (2 errors per month) after initiation of our first intervention (September 2021). Twelve weeks after initiation of the second intervention, a 2.9% (1 error per month) was noted. Afterward, there was a ten-week period of 0% errors.

Discussion

Sustainable reduction of DMR errors in pediatric patients with epilepsy was achieved by using specialty neurology nurses to scribe the care plan and creating order panels to facilitate accuracy of discharge medication orders without additional cost to the hospital.

Container-content interactions with radiopharmaceuticals: Seeing is believing

This perspective article addresses the critical issue of container-content interactions in the administration of intravenous medications, with a focus on radiopharmaceuticals used in nuclear medicine. Medication administration errors pose a significant challenge to patient safety. The "five rights" framework-ensuring the right patient, drug, time, dose, and route-serves as a cornerstone for safe drug administration. In the context of radiopharmaceuticals, notable for their use in nuclear medicine, adherence to these principles is paramount due to their unique properties and role in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures. The article explores the impact of container materials, particularly in syringes, on radiopharmaceutical stability and administration accuracy. It delves into the complexities of sorption phenomena, highlighting studies demonstrating its occurrence and potential consequences, including variations in administered doses and compromised diagnostic or therapeutic outcomes. Noteworthy factors influencing sorption include the type of radiopharmaceutical, container composition, molecular properties, and dilution. Findings revealing residual activity in syringes and identifying specific components, such as lubricants, silicon gaskets, and plungers, contributing to adsorption are presented. Migration of metal contaminants from container to content is discussed, emphasizing the potential impact on radiochemical yield and stability. There is a need for comprehensive studies to characterize drug-container interactions and poses crucial questions about the true benefit patients derive from prescribed activities. It challenges current practices, suggesting a need for tailored activity levels, container validation protocols, and rigorous testing of hospital preparations. Ultimately, this perspective paper calls for a deeper understanding of these interactions, urging regulatory consideration and standardization to ensure optimal drug administration and patient outcomes.

Assessment of clinical pharmacist interventions using a web-based application in a Saudi Arabian Tertiary Hospital

Objectives

Medication-related problems are a top concern of clinical pharmacists. Medication-related problems can cause patient harm and increase the number of visits, hospital admissions, and length of hospital stay. The objective was to assess clinical pharmacy medication-related problem-related interventions in a tertiary care setting.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study was conducted at King Fahad Armed Forces Hospital in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) between June 2021 and June 2022. The data were extracted monthly from a new web-based Microsoft Excel application documenting medication-related problems during any stage of the medication use process.

Results

A total of 5310 medication-related problem-related interventions in 1494 patients were performed. The departments associated with the highest frequency of medication-related problem-related interventions were the critical care unit (26.9%), intensive care unit (23.8%), anticoagulation clinic (17.1%), medical ward (11.3%), and nephrology unit (6.8%). The most common type of medication-related problem-related interventions included inappropriate dosage regimens (25.6%), monitoring drug effect or therapeutic drug monitoring (24.4%), requirement of additional drug therapy (21.9%), and inappropriate drug selection (14.1%). The proposed interventions were accepted by physicians in 97% of the incidents. The most frequent medication classes associated with medication-related problem-related interventions were cardiovascular agents (47.6%), antimicrobial agents (27.2%), and nutrition and blood substitute agents (11.4%). The most frequent medication groups associated with medication-related problem-related interventions were anticoagulants (25.6%) and antibiotics (25.2%).

Conclusions

The current findings characterize the medication-related problem-related interventions addressed in clinical pharmacy at a tertiary care setting. The high rate of physician acceptance emphasizes the integral patient safety role of clinical pharmacy services.

Study to evaluate awareness about medication errors and impact of an educational intervention among healthcare personnel in a cancer hospital

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors (MEs) are preventable incidents that can result in harm to patients. Therefore, it is essential for healthcare professionals (HCPs) to be well-informed about MEs. This study aims to assess the awareness levels of HCPs and the impact of educational intervention on their understanding of MEs.

METHODS

Responses to a 17-question structured, self-administered questionnaire assessing the awareness of HCPs regarding fundamental aspects of MEs, ME reporting systems, and their ability to make recommendations for improving the system for handling the MEs were collected both before and after two weeks of educational intervention administration.

RESULTS

Of a total of 114 HCPs who initially participated in the study, six dropped following the intervention. The awareness regarding the Class A questionnaire was good in most physicians (60%), nurses (60%), and pharmacists (57%) before the intervention, which improved postintervention, with physicians (80%), nurses (32%), and pharmacists (78%) demonstrating excellent awareness. The awareness level in the Class B questionnaire was also improved to excellent in most physicians (70%), pharmacists (85%), and nurses (85%) following the intervention, while it was excellent only in 50%, 35%, and 1% of physicians, pharmacists, and nurses, respectively, preintervention. In the Class C questionnaire, most physicians (40%) and nurses (60%) had good awareness, while pharmacists (35%) demonstrated excellent awareness preintervention. Postintervention, most physicians (70%), nurses (77%), and pharmacists (64%) exhibited excellent awareness.

CONCLUSION

Most oncology practice HCPs demonstrate a good to average level of awareness regarding MEs. Clinical pharmacists' educational interventions can significantly enhance awareness among HCPs concerning MEs.

Older Persons' and Health Care Professionals' Design Choices When Co-Designing a Medication Plan Aiming to Promote Patient Safety: Case Study

BACKGROUND

Harm from medications is a major patient safety challenge among older persons. Adverse drug events tend to arise when prescribing or evaluating medications; therefore, interventions targeting these may promote patient safety. Guidelines highlight the value of a joint plan for continued treatment. If such a plan includes medications, a medication plan promoting patient safety is advised. There is growing evidence for the benefits of including patients and health care professionals in initiatives for improving health care products and services through co-design.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify participants' needs and requirements for a medication plan and explore their reasoning for different design choices.

METHODS

Using a case study design, we collected and analyzed qualitative and quantitative data and compared them side by side. We explored the needs and requirements for a medication plan expressed by 14 participants (older persons, nurses, and physicians) during a co-design initiative in a regional health system in Sweden. We performed a directed content analysis of qualitative data gathered from co-design sessions and interviews. Descriptive statistics were used to analyze the quantitative data from survey answers.

RESULTS

A medication plan must provide an added everyday value related to safety, effort, and engagement. The physicians addressed challenges in setting aside time to apply a medication plan, whereas the older persons raised the potential for increased patient involvement. According to the participants, a medication plan needs to support communication, continuity, and interaction. The nurses specifically addressed the need for a plan that was easy to gain an overview of. Important function requirements included providing instant access, automation, and attention. Content requirements included providing detailed information about the medication treatment. Having the plan linked to the medication list and instantly obtainable information was also requested.

CONCLUSIONS

After discussing the needs and requirements for a medication plan, the participants agreed on an iteratively developed medication plan prototype linked to the medication list within the existing electronic health record. According to the participants, the medication plan prototype may promote patient safety and enable patient engagement, but concerns were raised about its use in daily clinical practice. The last step in the co-design framework is testing the intervention to explore how it works and connects with users. Therefore, testing the medication plan prototype in clinical practice would be a future step.

Association of Direct Oral Anticoagulation Management Strategies With Clinical Outcomes for Adults With Atrial Fibrillation

Importance

Anticoagulation management services (AMSs; ie, warfarin clinics) have evolved to include patients treated with direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), but it is unknown whether DOAC therapy management services improve outcomes for patients with atrial fibrillation (AF).

Objective

To compare outcomes associated with 3 DOAC care models for preventing adverse anticoagulation-related outcomes among patients with AF.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This retrospective cohort study included 44 746 adult patients with a diagnosis of AF who initiated oral anticoagulation (DOAC or warfarin) between August 1, 2016, and December 31, 2019, in 3 Kaiser Permanente (KP) regions. Statistical analysis was conducted from August 2021 through May 2023.

Exposures

Each KP region used an AMS to manage warfarin but used distinct approaches to DOAC care: (1) usual care (UC) by the prescribing clinician, (2) UC plus an automated population management tool (PMT), or (3) pharmacist-managed AMS care. Propensity scores and inverse probability of treatment weights (IPTWs) were estimated. Direct oral anticoagulant care models were first indirectly compared using warfarin as a common comparator within each region and then directly compared across regions.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Patients were followed up until the first occurrence of an outcome (composite of thromboembolic stroke, intracranial hemorrhage, other major bleeding, or death), discontinuation of KP membership, or December 31, 2020.

Results

Overall, 44 746 patients were included: 6182 in the UC care model (3297 DOAC; 2885 warfarin), 33 625 in the UC plus PMT care model (21 891 DOAC; 11 734 warfarin), and 4939 in the AMS care model (2089 DOAC; 2850 warfarin). Baseline characteristics (mean [SD] age, 73.1 [10.6] years, 56.1% male, 67.2% non-Hispanic White, median CHA2DS2-VASc [congestive heart failure, hypertension, age ≥75 years, diabetes, stroke, vascular disease, age 65-74 years, female sex] score of 3 [IQR, 2-5]) were well balanced after IPTW. Over a median follow-up of 2 years, patients who received the UC plus PMT or AMS care model did not have significantly better outcomes than those who received UC. The incidence rate of the composite outcome was 5.4% per year for DOAC and 9.1% per year for warfarin for those in the UC group, 6.1% per year for DOAC and 10.5% per year for those in the UC plus PMT group, and 5.1% per year for DOAC and 8.0% per year for those in the AMS group. The IPTW-adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) for the composite outcome comparing DOAC vs warfarin were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.79-1.05) in the UC group, 0.85 (95% CI, 0.79-0.90) in the UC plus PMT group, and 0.84 (95% CI, 0.72-0.99) in the AMS group (P = .62 for heterogeneity across care models). When directly comparing patients receiving DOAC, the IPTW-adjusted HR was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.85-1.34) for the UC plus PMT group vs the UC group and 0.85 (95% CI, 0.71-1.02) for the AMS group vs the UC group.

Conclusions and Relevance

This cohort study did not find appreciably better outcomes for patients receiving DOAC who were managed by either a UC plus PMT or AMS care model compared with UC.

Small patients, big challenges: navigating pediatric drug manipulations to prevent medication errors - a comprehensive review

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors during drug manipulations in pediatric care pose significant challenges to patient safety and optimal medication management. Epidemiological studies have revealed a high prevalenceof medication errors throughout the medication process. Due to the lack of age-appropriate dosage forms, medication manipulation is common in pediatric drug administration. The consequences of these manipulations on drug efficacy and safety could be devastating, highlighting the need for evidence-based guidelines and standardized compounding practices.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on examining medication errors in pediatric care and delving into the manipulation of medicinal products.

EXPERT OPINION

The observed prevalence of medication errors and manipulations underscores the importance of addressing these issues to enhance patient safety and improve medication outcomes in pediatric care. Overall, the development of age-appropriate formulations and the dissemination of comprehensive clinical guidelines are essential steps toward improving medication safety and minimizing manipulations in pediatric healthcare settings.

Impact of automated dispensing cabinets on dispensing errors, interruptions and pillbox preparation time

AIM

This work aimed to evaluate the impact of automated dispensing cabinets on the dispensing error rate, the number of interruptions, and pillbox preparation times.

METHODS

A prospective observational study was conducted across 16 wards in two departments (internal medicine and surgery) of a large teaching hospital. The study compared eight wards using automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) and eight using a traditional ward stock (TWS) method. A disguised observation technique was used to compare occurrences of dispensing errors and interruptions and pillbox preparation times. The proportion of errors was calculated by dividing the number of doses with one or more errors by the total number of opportunities for error. Wards participating in the 'More time for patients' project-a Lean Management approach-were compared with those not participating. The potential severity of intercepted errors was assessed.

RESULTS

Our observations recorded 2924 opportunities for error in the preparation of 570 pillboxes by 132 nurses. We measured a significantly lower overall error rate (1.0% vs 5.0%, p=0.0001), significantly fewer interruptions per hour (3.2 vs 5.7, p=0.008), and a significantly faster mean preparation time per drug (32 s vs 40 s, p=0.0017) among ADC wards than among TWS wards, respectively. We observed a significantly lower overall error rate (1.4% vs 4.4%, p=0.0268) and a non-significantly lower number of interruptions per hour (3.8 vs 5.1, p=0.0802) among wards participating in the 'More time for patients' project.

CONCLUSIONS

A high dispensing-error rate was observed among wards using TWS methods. Wards using ADCs connected to computerised physician order entry and installed in a dedicated room had fewer dispensing errors and interruptions and their nurses prepared pillboxes faster. Wards participating in a Lean Management project had lower error rates than wards not using this approach.

Virtual family-centered hospital rounds in the neonatal intensive care unit: protocol for a cluster randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Family-centered rounds is recognized as a best practice for hospitalized children, but it has only been possible for children whose families can physically be at the bedside during hospital rounds. The use of telehealth to bring a family member virtually to the child's bedside during hospital rounds is a promising solution. We aim to evaluate the impact of virtual family-centered hospital rounds in the neonatal intensive care unit on parental and neonatal outcomes.

METHODS

This two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial will randomize families of hospitalized infants to have the option to use telehealth for virtual hospital rounds (intervention) or usual care (control). The intervention-arm families will also have the option to participate in hospital rounds in-person or to not participate in hospital rounds. All eligible infants who are admitted to this single-site neonatal intensive care unit during the study period will be included. Eligibility requires that there be an English-proficient adult parent or guardian. We will measure participant-level outcome data to test the impact on family-centered rounds attendance, parent experience, family-centered care, parent activation, parent health-related quality of life, length of stay, breastmilk feeding, and neonatal growth. Additionally, we will conduct a mixed methods implementation evaluation using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework.

DISCUSSION

The findings from this trial will increase our understanding about virtual family-centered hospital rounds in the neonatal intensive care unit. The mixed methods implementation evaluation will enhance our understanding about the contextual factors that influence the implementation and rigorous evaluation of our intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05762835. Status: Not yet recruiting. First posted: March 10, 2023; last update posted: March 10, 2023.

Virtual Family-Centered Rounds in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Protocol for a Cluster Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Family-centered rounds is recognized as a best practice for hospitalized children, but it has only been possible for children whose families can physically be at the bedside during hospital rounds. The use of telehealth to bring a family member virtually to the child’s bedside during rounds is a promising solution. We aim to evaluate the impact of virtual family-centered rounds in the neonatal intensive care unit on parental and neonatal outcomes. Methods: This two-arm cluster randomized controlled trial will randomize families of hospitalized infants to have the option to use telehealth for virtual rounds (intervention) or usual care (control). The intervention-arm families will also have the option to participate in rounds in-person or to not participate in rounds. All eligible infants who are admitted to this single-site neonatal intensive care unit during the study period will be included. Eligibility requires that there be an English-proficient adult parent or guardian. We will measure participant-level outcome data to test the impact on family-centered rounds attendance, parent experience, family-centered care, parent activation, parent health-related quality of life, length of stay, breastmilk feeding, and neonatal growth. Additionally, we will conduct a mixed methods implementation evaluation using the RE-AIM (Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance) framework. Discussion: The findings from this trial will increase our understanding about virtual family-centered rounds in the neonatal intensive care unit. The mixed methods implementation evaluation will enhance our understanding about the contextual factors that influence the implementation and rigorous evaluation of our intervention. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05762835. Status: Not yet recruiting. First Posted: 3/10/2023; Last Update Posted: 3/10/2023.

Limiting Factors in Implementing Pharmacovigilance Principles in the Elderly

The overarching aim of pharmacovigilance is to ensure the safe and effective usage of medication across the population and optimise medicines through holistic considerations. However, within the heterogeneous elderly population, several unique factors are at play, limiting the ability of clinicians to fulfil this aim. A matured physiology influencing the response and effects of drugs, increased polypharmacy enabling drug-drug interactions, and greater consumption of concurrent herbal medicines predispose patients to harmful drug events. This increasingly multimorbid subpopulation requires complex pharmaceutical regimens encouraging inappropriate prescribing and medicine non-adherence leading to suboptimal therapy. Furthermore, restrictive practices in clinical trials commonly exclude elderly patients creating disparities from expected findings within a real-world setting. These issues create an environment where elderly patients are at a heightened risk of adverse drug events and clinicians are forced to make significant decisions from limited information. With projections showing that this demographic will continue growing in size, the true burden of these limiting factors is yet to be realised.

Effect of Patient and Family Centered I-PASS on adverse event rates in hospitalized children with complex chronic conditions

BACKGROUND

Children with complex chronic conditions (CCCs) are at risk for adverse events (AEs) during hospitalizations.

OBJECTIVE

We compared the effect of Patient and Family Centered (PFC)I-PASS on AE rates in children with and without CCCs.

DESIGNS, SETTINGS, AND PARTICIPANTS

Patients were drawn from the PFCI-PASS study, which included 3106 hospitalized children from seven North American pediatric hospitals between December 2014 and January 2017.

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

An effect modification analysis did not show difference in the intervention on children with and without CCCs (RRR 0.81, 95% CI [0.59-1.10]; p = .2).

RESULTS

In multivariable analysis, the adjusted incidence rate ratiofor AEs in children with CCCs was 0.5 (95% CI = 0.3-0.9, p = .01) with PFC I-PASS exposure; there was no statistically significant change in AEs for children without CCCs [IRR 0.6 (95% CI = 0.3-1.2; p = .1)].

Potentially inappropriate medication use and associated factors in residents of long-term care facilities: A nationwide cohort study

Background: Residents in long-term care (LTC) facilities (LTCFs) may have multimorbidity and be unable to self-administer medication. Thus, due to the risk of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), epidemiological studies on PIM use and its associated factors should be conducted to ensure safe medication use for residents in LTCFs. Objective: We evaluated PIM use among residents of LTCF and the associated factors in residents of LTCFs in Korea using a nationwide database. Methods: This cross-sectional study used the Korea National Health Insurance Service Senior Cohort (KNHIS-SC) database 2.0 of the National Health Insurance Service (NHIS), a single public insurer in Korea. We analyzed older adults aged ≥65 years who were residents of LTCFs in 2018, using the KNHIS-SC database. The 2019 American Geriatrics Society (AGS) Beers criteria was used for PIM identification. The prevalence of PIM use was defined as the proportion of LTCF residents who received PIM prescriptions at least once. We evaluated the frequency of prescriptions, including PIMs, and determined the most frequently used PIMs. We also conducted a multivariable logistic regression analysis to identify the factors associated with PIM use. Results: The prevalence of PIM among the LTCF residents was 81.6%. The prevalence of PIM was 74.9% for LTC grades 1 or 2 (high dependence) and 85.2% for LTC grades 3-5 (low dependence). Quetiapine was the most frequently prescribed PIM, followed by chlorpheniramine. The low dependence level was significantly associated with PIM use (odds ratio of LTC grades 3-5: 1.49, 95% confidence interval 1.32-1.68, reference: LTC grades 1 or 2); moreover, the number of medical institutions visited, and medications emerged as primary influencing factors. Conclusion: Most LTCF residents were vulnerable to PIM exposure. Furthermore, exposure to PIMs is associated with LTC grade. This result highlights the need for comprehensive medication management of LTCF residents.

Implementation of an electronic pharmacy scoring tool to prioritize clinical pharmacists' daily workflow at a pediatric institution

PURPOSE

To describe the development and implementation of an electronic pharmacy scoring tool (PST) to prioritize patients requiring clinical pharmacy intervention and assist in workload management in a freestanding pediatric hospital using quality improvement methodology.

SUMMARY

The department of pharmacy at Nationwide Children's Hospital developed a pediatric-specific PST within the electronic medical record to aid in patient prioritization and ensuring proficient daily workflow and qualifying workload for clinical pharmacists. The PST identifies patients for monitoring of high-risk medications, complex medication regimens, or abnormal laboratory values related to medication management. Application of the scoring tool ensures each patient is reviewed by clinical pharmacy staff each day, with initial efforts focused on patients with significant clinical pharmacy needs. This tool reduces the need for time-intensive manual chart review for identification of patients whose medication use and/or laboratory values afford greater opportunity for pharmacist intervention. Additionally, clinical pharmacist productivity metrics and workloads are considered, with the qualifying of patient care activities and quantification of time spent on patient review.

CONCLUSION

A PST enhances pediatric patient prioritization for clinical pharmacists by identifying patients most likely to require intervention in real time. The scoring tool enables future assessment of clinical pharmacists' workload assignments and better quantifies time spent on patient care activities.

Comprehensive Pharmacist-led Transitions-of-care Medication Management around Hospital Discharge Adds Modest Cost Relative to Usual Care: Time-and-Motion Cost Analysis

Optimal medication management is important during hospitalization and at discharge because post-discharge adverse drug events (ADEs) are common, often preventable, and contribute to patient harms, healthcare utilization, and costs. Conduct a cost analysis of a comprehensive pharmacist-led transitions-of-care medication management intervention for older adults during and after hospital discharge. Twelve intervention components addressed medication reconciliation, medication review, and medication adherence. Trained, experienced pharmacists delivered the intervention to older adults with chronic comorbidities at 2 large U.S. academic centers. To quantify and categorize time spent on the intervention, we conducted a time-and-motion analysis of study pharmacists over 36 sequential workdays (14 519 min) involving 117 patients. For 40 patients' hospitalizations, we observed all intervention activities. We used the median minutes spent and pharmacist wages nationally to calculate cost per hospitalization (2020 U.S. dollars) from the hospital perspective, relative to usual care. Pharmacists spent a median of 66.9 min per hospitalization (interquartile range 46.1-90.1), equating to $101 ($86 to $116 in sensitivity analyses). In unadjusted analyses, study site was associated with time spent (medians 111 and 51.8 min) while patient primary language, discharge disposition, number of outpatient medications, and patient age were not. In this cost analysis, comprehensive medication management around discharge cost about $101 per hospitalization, with variation across sites. This cost is at least an order of magnitude less than published costs associated with ADEs, hospital readmissions, or other interventions designed to reduce readmissions. Work is ongoing to assess the current intervention's effectiveness.

Association of potentially inappropriate medications and need for long-term care among older adults: a matched cohort study

BACKGROUND

With an increase in the aging population, the number of older adults who require long-term care (LTC) is growing, enhancing drug-related issues. The reduced capacity of LTC users to precisely utilize medical services poses additional challenges owing to restrictions in daily activities. We compared older adults who required LTC with those who did not require LTC to confirm differences in the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs), frequently used PIMs, and associating factors in Korea.

METHODS

Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service cohort data, adults aged ≥ 65 years as of 2017 who were LTC beneficiaries (at home and LTC facilities) were selected and matched 1:1 with a control group (LTC non-beneficiaries). PIM was defined based on the 2019 American Society of Geriatrics Beers criteria. PIM use and medical resource utilization according to LTC requirements were compared for one year after the index date. After correcting for other confounding variables, differences in the risk of PIM use on person-based according to LTC eligibility were assessed using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Among the 13,251 older adults requiring LTC in 2017, 9682 were matched with counterparts and included. Among those who received an outpatient prescription including PIM at least once yearly, 83.6 and 87.6% were LTC beneficiaries and LTC non-beneficiaries, respectively (p < 0.001). Using the number of outpatient prescriptions as the baseline, 37.2 and 33.2% were LTC beneficiaries and LTC non-beneficiaries, respectively (p < 0.001). In both groups, elevated PIM use depended on increased medical resource utilization, as shown by increased outpatient visits and medical care institutions visited. Adjusting other influencing factors, the need for LTC did not significantly associated with PIM use (odds ratio [OR] 0.93, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.84-1.04); the number of drugs consumed (3-4: OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.25-1.61; 5-9: OR 2.24, 95% CI 1.98-2.53; 10 and more: OR 3.72, 95% CI 3.03-4.55; reference group: 2 and less), frequency of visits (7-15: OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.71-2.23; 16-26: OR 3.51, 95% CI 3.02-4.07; 27-42: OR 5.84, 95% CI 4.84-7.05; 43 and more: OR 10.30, 95% CI 8.15-13.01; reference group: 6 and less), and visits to multiple medical care institutions (3-4: OR 1.96, 95% CI 1.76-2.19; 5 and more: OR 3.21, 95% CI 2.76-3.73; reference group: 2 and less) emerged as primary influencing factors. PIMs mainly prescribed included first-generation antihistamines, benzodiazepines, and Z-drugs in both groups; quetiapine ranked second-highest among LTC beneficiaries.

CONCLUSIONS

The LTC demand did not significantly associated with PIM utilization. However, the number of drugs consumed, and the pattern of medical resource use were important factors, regardless of LTC requirements. This highlights the need to implement comprehensive drug management focusing on patients receiving polypharmacy and visiting multiple care institutions, regardless of LTC needs.

Medication adverse events in the ambulatory setting: A mixed-methods analysis

DISCLAIMER

In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time.

PURPOSE

To characterize ambulatory care adverse drug events reported to the Collaborative Healthcare Patient Safety Organization (CHPSO), a network of 400 hospitals across the United States, and identify addressable contributing factors.

METHODS

We abstracted deidentified ambulatory care CHPSO reports compiled from May 2012 to October 2018 that included medication-related adverse events to identify implicated medications and contributing factors. We dual-coded 20% of the sample. We quantitatively calculated co-occurring frequent item sets of contributing factors and then applied a qualitative thematic analysis of co-occurring sets of contributing factors for each drug class using an inductive analytic approach to develop formal themes.

RESULTS

Of 1,244 events in the sample, 208 were medication related. The most commonly implicated medication classes were anticoagulants (n = 97, or 46% of events), antibiotics (n = 24, 11%), hypoglycemics (n = 19, 9%), and opioids (n = 17, 8%). For anticoagulants, timely follow-up on supratherapeutic international normalized ratio (INR) values often occurred before the development of symptoms. Incident reports citing antibiotics often described prescribing errors and failure to review clinical contraindications. Reports citing hypoglycemic drugs often described low blood sugar events due to a lack of patient education or communication. Reports citing opioids often described drug-drug interactions, commonly involving benzodiazepines.

CONCLUSION

Ambulatory care prescribing clinicians and community pharmacists have the potential to mitigate harm related to anticoagulants, antibiotics, hypoglycemics, and opioids. Recommendations include increased follow-up for subtherapeutic INRs, improved medical record integration and chart review for antibiotic prescriptions, enhanced patient education regarding hypoglycemics, and alerts to dissuade coprescription of opioids and benzodiazepines.

Comparison of a Voluntary Safety Reporting System to a Global Trigger Tool for Identifying Adverse Events in an Oncology Population

OBJECTIVE

There is a lack of research on adverse event (AE) detection in oncology patients, despite the propensity for iatrogenic harm. Two common methods include voluntary safety reporting (VSR) and chart review tools, such as the Institute for Healthcare Improvement's Global Trigger Tool (GTT). Our objective was to compare frequency and type of AEs detected by a modified GTT compared with VSR for identifying AEs in oncology patients in a larger clinical trial.

METHODS

Patients across 6 oncology units (from July 1, 2013, through May 29, 2015) were randomly selected. Retrospective chart reviews were conducted by a team of nurses and physicians to identify AEs using the GTT. The VSR system was queried by the department of quality and safety of the hospital. Adverse event frequencies, type, and harm code for both methods were compared.

RESULTS

The modified GTT detected 0.90 AEs per patient (79 AEs in 88 patients; 95% [0.71-1.12] AEs per patient) that were predominantly medication AEs (53/79); more than half of the AEs caused harm to the patients (41/79, 52%), but only one quarter were preventable (21/79; 27%). The VSR detected 0.24 AEs per patient (21 AEs in 88 patients; 95% [0.15-0.37] AEs per patient), a large plurality of which were medication/intravenous related (8/21); more than half did not cause harm (70%). Only 2% of the AEs (2/100) were detected by both methods.

CONCLUSIONS

Neither the modified GTT nor the VSR system alone is sufficient for detecting AEs in oncology patient populations. Further studies exploring methods such as automated AE detection from electronic health records and leveraging patient-reported AEs are needed.

Describing and Quantifying Wrong-Patient Medication Errors Through a Study of Incident Reports

Purpose

Our aim was to inform a new definition of wrong-patient errors, obtained through an analysis of incident reports related to medication errors.

Methods

We investigated wrong-patient medication errors in incident reports voluntarily reported by medical staff using a web-based incident reporting system from 2015 to 2016 at a university hospital in Japan. Incident report content was separately evaluated by four evaluators using investigational methods for clinical incidents from the Clinical Risk Unit and the Association of Litigation and Risk Management. They investigated whether it was the patient or drug that was incorrectly chosen during wrong-patient errors in drug administration in incident reports and assessed contributory factors which affected the error occurrence. The evaluators integrated the results and interpreted them together.

Results

Out of a total 4337 IRs, only 30 cases (2%) contained wrong-patient errors in medication administration. The cases where the intended drugs were administered to incorrect patients occurred less frequently than cases where the wrong drugs were administered to the intended patients through the investigation of wrong targets. After a discussion, the evaluators concluded that the patient - drug/CPOE screen mismatch, caused by choosing the wrong patient, drug, or CPOE screen (mix-ups), occurred in the wrong-patient medication errors. These errors were caused by three conditions: (1) where two patients/drugs were listed next to one another, (2) where two patients’ last names/drugs’ names were the same, and (3) where the patient/drug/CPOE screen in front of the staff involved was believed to be the correct one. Additionally, these errors also involved insufficient confirmation, which led to failure to detect and correct the mismatch occurrences.

Conclusion

Based on our study, we propose a new definition of wrong-patient medication errors: they consisted of choosing a wrong target and insufficient confirmation. We will investigate other types of wrong-patient errors to apply this definition.

Actual drug-related harms in residential aged care facilities: a narrative review

INTRODUCTION

Older people in residential aged care facilities (RACFs) have a high risk of safety issues and concerns about the potential quality of care received. This narrative review investigates the types of actual drug-related harms, their prevalence, reporting of any standard definitions for these harms, and their identification methods.

AREAS COVERED

The authors conducted a systematic search on Ovid Embase, Ovid Medline, and PubMed from March 2001 to March 2021. This narrative review included all types of studies targeting aged care residents aged 65 years and above with actual drug-related harms.

EXPERT OPINION

The prevalence of actual drug-related harms in residents ranged from 0.07% to 63.0%. Falls, drug-drug interactions, neuropsychiatric symptoms, anaphylaxis, urinary tract infection, hypoglycemia, hypokalaemia, and acute kidney injury are the most common drug-related harms in older residents. Psychotropic drugs are the most common drug class implicated in these harms. Evidence related to the association between individual psychotropic drugs and injury, or harm is also lacking. Due to the variation in study duration, reported prevalence, identification methods, and absence of a definition for actual drug-related harms in most studies, further research is mandated to understand the prevalence and clinical implications of drug-related harms in older residents.

Methodological approaches for medication error analyses in patient safety and pharmacovigilance reporting systems: a scoping review protocol

INTRODUCTION

Medication errors (MEs) are associated with patient harm and high economic costs. Healthcare authorities and pharmacovigilance organisations in many countries routinely collect data on MEs via reporting systems to improve patient safety and for learning purposes. Different approaches have been developed and used for the ME analysis, but an overview of the scope of available methods currently is lacking. This scoping review aimed to identify, explore and map available literature on methods used to analyse MEs in reporting systems.

METHODS AND ANALYSES

This protocol describes a scoping review, based on the Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework. A systematic search will be performed in MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), Cinahl (EBSCOhost), Cochrane Central, Google Scholar, websites of the major pharmacovigilance centres and national healthcare safety agencies, and citation search in Scopus in August 2022. All retrieved records are to be independently screened by two researchers on title, abstract and full text, involving a third researcher in case of disagreement. Data will be extracted and presented in descriptive and tabular form. The extraction will be based on information about methods of ME analyses, type of reporting system and information on MEs (medication name, ATC codes, ME type, medication-event categories and harm categories).

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required. The results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals, scientific networks and relevant conferences.

Effects of a refined evidence-based toolkit and mentored implementation on medication reconciliation at 18 hospitals: results of the MARQUIS2 study

BACKGROUND

The first Multicenter Medication Reconciliation Quality Improvement (QI) Study (MARQUIS1) demonstrated that mentored implementation of a medication reconciliation best practices toolkit decreased total unintentional medication discrepancies in five hospitals, but results varied by site. The objective of this study was to determine the effects of a refined toolkit on a larger group of hospitals.

METHODS

We conducted a pragmatic quality improvement study (MARQUIS2) at 18 North American hospitals or hospital systems from 2016 to 2018. Incorporating lessons learnt from MARQUIS1, we implemented a refined toolkit, offering 17 system-level and 6 patient-level interventions. One of eight physician mentors coached each site via monthly calls and performed one to two site visits. The primary outcome was number of unintentional medication discrepancies in admission or discharge orders per patient. Time series analysis used multivariable Poisson regression.

RESULTS

A total of 4947 patients were sampled, including 1229 patients preimplementation and 3718 patients postimplementation. Both the number of system-level interventions adopted per site and the proportion of patients receiving patient-level interventions increased over time. During the intervention, patients experienced a steady decline in their medication discrepancy rate from 2.85 discrepancies per patient to 0.98 discrepancies per patient. An interrupted time series analysis of the 17 sites with sufficient data for analysis showed the intervention was associated with a 5% relative decrease in discrepancies per month over baseline temporal trends (adjusted incidence rate ratio: 0.95, 95% CI 0.93 to 0.97, p<0.001). Receipt of patient-level interventions was associated with decreased discrepancy rates, and these associations increased over time as sites adopted more system-level interventions.

CONCLUSION

A multicentre medication reconciliation QI initiative using mentored implementation of a refined best practices toolkit, including patient-level and system-level interventions, was associated with a substantial decrease in unintentional medication discrepancies over time. Future efforts should focus on sustainability and spread.

Eliciting willingness-to-pay to prevent hospital medication administration errors in the UK: a contingent valuation survey

Medication errors are common in hospitals. These errors can result in adverse drug events (ADEs), which can reduce the health and well-being of patients', and their relatives and caregivers. Interventions have been developed to reduce medication errors, including those that occur at the administration stage.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to elicit willingness-to-pay (WTP) values to prevent hospital medication administration errors.

DESIGN AND SETTING

An online, contingent valuation (CV) survey was conducted, using the random card-sort elicitation method, to elicit WTP to prevent medication errors.

PARTICIPANTS

A representative sample of the UK public.

METHODS

Seven medication error scenarios, varying in the potential for harm and the severity of harm, were valued. Scenarios were developed with input from: clinical experts, focus groups with members of the public and piloting. Mean and median WTP values were calculated, excluding protest responses or those that failed a logic test. A two-part model (logit, generalised linear model) regression analysis was conducted to explore predictive characteristics of WTP.

RESULTS

Responses were collected from 1001 individuals. The proportion of respondents willing to pay to prevent a medication error increased as the severity of the ADE increased and was highest for scenarios that described actual harm occurring. Mean WTP across the scenarios ranged from £45 (95% CI £36 to £54) to £278 (95% CI £200 to £355). Several factors influenced both the value and likelihood of WTP, such as: income, known experience of medication errors, sex, field of work, marriage status, education level and employment status. Predictors of WTP were not, however, consistent across scenarios.

CONCLUSIONS

This CV study highlights how the UK public value preventing medication errors. The findings from this study could be used to carry out a cost-benefit analysis which could inform implementation decisions on the use of technology to reduce medication administration errors in UK hospitals.

Medication Errors at a Tertiary Hospital Intensive Care Unit

Background

The intensive care unit (ICU) generates more medication prescriptions per patient day than any other unit in the hospital. The dynamics of the ICU environment, coupled with the complexity of patient pathology, increases the risk of medication errors. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence and spectrum of medication errors in an adult general ICU in Johannesburg, South Africa.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was conducted at a 19-bed ICU in a tertiary-level hospital in Johannesburg. Data were independently collected by two of the study investigators. The doctors’ prescription and the nurses’ administration section of patient bedside charts were scrutinized for drug prescription and administration errors.

Results

Of the 656 patient days studied, 3237 drugs (5.6 drugs per patient day) were prescribed. There were a total of 359 medication errors, comprising 237 (66.0%) prescription and 122 (34.0%) administration errors. The total error rate per 1000 patient days was 621.1, while the total error rate per 1000 drug prescriptions was 110.9. The most common errors were incorrect dose prescribed (n=69, 19.2%), incorrect dosing interval prescribed (n=48, 13.4%), incorrect dose administered (n=42, 11.7%) and failure to administer the prescribed drug (n=38, 10.6%).

Conclusion

The overall occurrence of medication errors is high but is in keeping with general international trends. Targeted interventions should be implemented to minimize the frequency of medication errors in the ICU and consequent risk to patients.

A Quality Improvement Approach to Improving Discharge Documentation

Introduction

Accurate discharge documentation is critical to ensuring a safe and effective transition of care following hospitalization, yet many discharge summaries do not meet consensus standards for content. A local needs assessment demonstrated gaps in documentation of 3 essential elements: discharge diagnosis, discharge medications, and follow-up appointments. This study aimed to increase the completion of three discharge elements from a baseline of 45% by 20 percentage points over 16 months for patients discharged from the general pediatrics service.

Methods

Ten discharge summaries were randomly selected and analyzed during each successive 2-week time period. Plan-Do-Study-Act cycles aimed to improve provider knowledge of essential discharge summary content, clarify communication during rounds, and create electronic health record shortcuts and quick-reference tools.

Results

The percentage of discharge summaries containing all 3 required elements increased from 45% to 73%. Specifically, documentation increased for discharge diagnosis (65%-87%), discharge medications (71%-90%), and follow-up appointments (88%-93%). There was no significant delay in discharge summary completion.

Conclusions

Discharge summaries are meaningfully and sustainably improved through provider education, workflows for clear communication, and electronic health record optimization.

Medication Errors in Anesthesiology: Is It Time to Train by Example? Vignettes Can Assess Error Awareness, Assessment of Harm, Disclosure, and Reporting Practices

BACKGROUND

Perioperative medication errors (MEs) are complex, multifactorial, and a significant source of in-hospital patient morbidity. Anesthesiologists' awareness of error and the potential for harm is not well understood, nor is their attitude to reporting and disclosure. Anesthesiologists are not routinely exposed to medication safety training.

METHODS

Ten clinical vignettes, describing an ME or a near miss, were developed using eDelphi consensus. An online survey instrument presented these vignettes to anesthesiologists along with a series of questions assessing error awareness, potential harm severity, the likelihood of reporting, and the likelihood of open disclosure to the patient. The study also explored the influence of prior medication safety training.

RESULTS

Eighty-nine anesthesiologists from 14 hospitals across Ireland (53.9% were residents, and 46.1% were attendings) completed the survey. Just 35.6% of anesthesiologists recalled having had medication safety training, more commonly among residents than attendings, although this failed to reach significance (P < 0.081). Medication error awareness varied with the vignette presented. Harm severity assessment was positively associated with error awareness. The likelihood of patient disclosure and incident reporting was both low and independent of harm severity assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative ME awareness and assessment of potential harm by anesthesiologists is variable. Self-reported rates of incident reporting and error disclosure fall short of the standards that might apply in an environment focused on candor and safety. An extensive education program is required to raise awareness of error and embed appropriate reporting and disclosure behaviors. Vignettes, designed by consensus, may be valuable in the delivery of such a curriculum.

Characterization of Medication Errors in a Medical Intensive Care Unit of a University Teaching Hospital in South Korea

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to characterize the current status of medication errors (MEs) throughout the medication therapy process from prescribing to use and monitoring in a medical intensive care unit (MICU) in Korea.

METHODS

Four trained research pharmacists collected data through retrospectively reviewing electronic medical records for adults hospitalized in the MICU in 2017. The occurrence of MEs was determined through interprofessional team discussion led by an academic faculty pharmacist and a medical intensivist based on the medication administration records (MARs). The type of MEs and the consequent ME-related outcome severity were categorized according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe and the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention, respectively.

RESULTS

Overall, electronic medical records for 293 patients with 78,761 MARs were reviewed in this study. At least one type of ME occurred in 271 patients (92.5%) in association with 16,203 MARs (21%), primarily caused by inappropriate dose (35.5%), drug (27.8%), and treatment duration (25.1%). Clinically significant harmful events occurred in 24 patients (8%), including life-threatening (n = 5) and death (n = 2) cases. The 2 patients died of enoxaparin-induced fatal hemorrhage and neutropenia associated with ganciclovir and cefepime. Antibiotics were the most common culprit medications leading to clinically significant harmful events.

CONCLUSIONS

In conclusion, MEs are prevalent in the MICU in Korea, most commonly prescribing errors. Although mostly benign, harmful events including deaths may occur due to MEs, mainly associated with antibiotics. Systematic strategies to minimize these potentially fatal MEs are urgently needed.

Defining Patient Safety Events in Inpatient Psychiatry

OBJECTIVES

The past 20 years have seen the emergence of a national movement to improve hospital-based healthcare safety in the United States. However, much of the foundational work and subsequent research have neglected inpatient psychiatry. The aim of this article was to advance a comprehensive approach for conceptualizing patient safety in inpatient psychiatry as framed by an application of the Institute of Medicine patient safety framework.

METHODS

This article develops a framework for characterizing patient safety in hospital-based mental health care. We discuss some of the conceptual and methodological issues related to defining what constitutes a patient safety event in inpatient psychiatry and then enumerate a comprehensive set of definitions of the types of safety events that occur in this setting.

RESULTS

Patient safety events in inpatient psychiatry are broadly categorized as adverse events and medical errors. Adverse events are composed of adverse drug events and nondrug adverse events, including self-harm or injury to self, assault, sexual contact, patient falls, and other injuries. Medical errors include medication errors and nonmedication errors, such as elopement and contraband. We have developed clear definitions that would be appropriate for use in epidemiological studies of inpatient mental health treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Psychiatry has not been an integral part of the national safety movement. As a first step toward breaching this chasm, we have considered how psychiatric events fit into the safety framework adopted across much of medicine. Patient safety should become a key part of inpatient psychiatry's mission and pursued rigorously as the subject of research and intervention efforts.

Reducing medication errors for adults in hospital settings

BACKGROUND

Medication errors are preventable events that may cause or lead to inappropriate medication use or patient harm while the medication is in the control of the healthcare professional or patient. Medication errors in hospitalised adults may cause harm, additional costs, and even death.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions to reduce medication errors in adults in hospital settings.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, five other databases and two trials registers on 16 January 2020.  SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and interrupted time series (ITS) studies investigating interventions aimed at reducing medication errors in hospitalised adults, compared with usual care or other interventions. Outcome measures included adverse drug events (ADEs), potential ADEs, preventable ADEs, medication errors, mortality, morbidity, length of stay, quality of life and identified/solved discrepancies. We included any hospital setting, such as inpatient care units, outpatient care settings, and accident and emergency departments.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care (EPOC) Group. Where necessary, we extracted and reanalysed ITS study data using piecewise linear regression, corrected for autocorrelation and seasonality, where possible.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 65 studies: 51 RCTs and 14 ITS studies, involving 110,875 participants. About half of trials gave rise to 'some concerns' for risk of bias during the randomisation process and one-third lacked blinding of outcome assessment. Most ITS studies presented low risk of bias. Most studies came from high-income countries or high-resource settings. Medication reconciliation -the process of comparing a patient's medication orders to the medications that the patient has been taking- was the most common type of intervention studied. Electronic prescribing systems, barcoding for correct administering of medications, organisational changes, feedback on medication errors, education of professionals and improved medication dispensing systems were other interventions studied. Medication reconciliation Low-certainty evidence suggests that medication reconciliation (MR) versus no-MR may reduce medication errors (odds ratio [OR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.17 to 1.74; 3 studies; n=379). Compared to no-MR, MR probably reduces ADEs (OR 0.38, 95%CI 0.18 to 0.80; 3 studies, n=1336 ; moderate-certainty evidence), but has little to no effect on length of stay (mean difference (MD) -0.30 days, 95%CI -1.93 to 1.33 days; 3 studies, n=527) and quality of life (MD -1.51, 95%CI -10.04 to 7.02; 1 study, n=131).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may reduce medication errors (OR 0.21, 95%CI 0.09 to 0.48; 8 studies, n=2648) and may increase ADEs (OR 1.34, 95%CI 0.73 to 2.44; 3 studies, n=2873). Compared to MR by other professionals, MR by pharmacists may have little to no effect on length of stay (MD -0.25, 95%CI -1.05 to 0.56; 6 studies, 3983). Moderate-certainty evidence shows that this intervention probably has little to no effect on mortality during hospitalisation (risk ratio (RR) 0.99, 95%CI 0.57 to 1.7; 2 studies, n=1000), and on readmissions at one month (RR 0.93, 95%CI 0.76 to 1.14; 2 studies, n=997); and low-certainty evidence suggests that the intervention may have little to no effect on quality of life (MD 0.00, 95%CI -14.09 to 14.09; 1 study, n=724).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that database-assisted MR conducted by pharmacists, versus unassisted MR conducted by pharmacists, may reduce potential ADEs (OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10 to 0.64; 2 studies, n=3326), and may have no effect on length of stay (MD 1.00, 95%CI -0.17 to 2.17; 1 study, n=311).  Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR performed by trained pharmacist technicians, versus pharmacists, may have little to no difference on length of stay (MD -0.30, 95%CI -2.12 to 1.52; 1 study, n=183). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Low-certainty evidence suggests that MR before admission may increase the identification of discrepancies compared with MR after admission (MD 1.27, 95%CI 0.46 to 2.08; 1 study, n=307). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Moderate-certainty evidence shows that multimodal interventions probably increase discrepancy resolutions compared to usual care (RR 2.14, 95%CI 1.81 to 2.53; 1 study, n=487). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE)/clinical decision support systems (CDSS) Moderate-certainty evidence shows that CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors compared to paper-based systems (OR 0.74, 95%CI 0.31 to 1.79; 2 studies, n=88).  Moderate-certainty evidence shows that, compared with standard CPOE/CDSS, improved CPOE/CDSS probably reduce medication errors (OR 0.85, 95%CI 0.74 to 0.97; 2 studies, n=630). Low-certainty evidence suggests that prioritised alerts provided by CPOE/CDSS may prevent ADEs compared to non-prioritised (inconsequential) alerts (MD 1.98, 95%CI 1.65 to 2.31; 1 study; participant numbers unavailable). Barcode identification of participants/medications Low-certainty evidence suggests that barcoding may reduce medication errors (OR 0.69, 95%CI 0.59 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=50,545). Reduced working hours Low-certainty evidence suggests that reduced working hours may reduce serious medication errors (RR 0.83, 95%CI 0.63 to 1.09; 1 study, n=634). However, the CI is compatible with important beneficial and detrimental effects. Feedback on prescribing errors Low-certainty evidence suggests that feedback on prescribing errors may reduce medication errors (OR 0.47, 95%CI 0.33 to 0.67; 4 studies, n=384). Dispensing system Low-certainty evidence suggests that dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors (OR 0.61, 95%CI 0.47 to 0.79; 2 studies, n=1775).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Low- to moderate-certainty evidence suggests that, compared to usual care, medication reconciliation, CPOE/CDSS, barcoding, feedback and dispensing systems in surgical wards may reduce medication errors and ADEs. However, the results are imprecise for some outcomes related to medication reconciliation and CPOE/CDSS. The evidence for other interventions is very uncertain. Powered and methodologically sound studies are needed to address the identified evidence gaps. Innovative, synergistic strategies -including those that involve patients- should also be evaluated.

Transformational strategies for optimizing use of medications and related therapies through us pharmacists and pharmacies: Findings from a national study

SETTING

Nonoptimized medication therapies (NOMTs) are associated with likely avoidable illnesses and mortality affecting millions of people and costing an estimated $528 billion per year in excess health spending in the United States. The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic brought into focus barriers limiting the ability of U.S. pharmacists and pharmacies to provide services that can reduce NOMTs and improve U.S. population health.

OBJECTIVES

This National Science Foundation Center for Health Organization Transformation study explored potential strategies that U.S. pharmacists, pharmacies, and their partners could implement to reduce NOMTs while also delivering other forms of value to U.S. populations from 2021 to 2025 (during and after the COVID-19 pandemic).

DESIGN

A panel of senior leaders representing the U.S. pharmacist and pharmacy sector participated in a 4-round Delphi process to identify unmet needs, barriers, change drivers, and priority strategies for meeting those needs. Data were gathered and analyzed by public health researchers, most of whom are outside the pharmacist and pharmacy sector.

RESULTS

A comprehensive set of evidence-based strategies with potential to reduce NOMTs, protect and improve population health and well-being, and strengthen the sector were identified. Four transformational strategies were recommended: comprehensive payment and practice transformation, strengthening pharmacy data interoperability infrastructure, development of unifying measurement and management mechanisms, and development of a more robust national research infrastructure. Strengthening health equity was a cross-cutting strategy affecting all areas.

CONCLUSION

The results may be of interest to policy makers, pharmacists, pharmacies, physicians, nurses and other clinicians, pharmaceutical firms, plan sponsors, plans, health systems, clinics, aging care, digital technology companies, and others interested in optimizing outcomes from medications and related therapies for U.S.

POPULATIONS

A clinical pharmacist-led integrated approach for evaluation of medication errors among medical intensive care unit patients

AIM

Medication errors jeopardize the safety of critically ill patients. Using only one method for the detection of medication errors may not reflect an existing picture of patient safety accurately. Therefore, we designed a clinical pharmacist-led integrated approach to evaluate incidence rate, type, and severity of medication errors and preventable adverse drug events (ADEs) and to assess the impact of the implementation of interventions recommended by the clinical pharmacist.

METHODS

A prospective study was conducted from November 2017 to January 2019 in the medical ICU. The clinical pharmacist performed a combination of medication error detection methods, which included medication chart review, patient monitoring until discharge/death, and attending medical rounds. Detected medication errors were intervened with prescribers. Based on the prescribers' decision on delivered interventions, patients were divided into two groups: A (clinical pharmacist's interventions were implemented), and B (clinical pharmacist's interventions were not implemented). We compared patients' outcomes obtained from study groups to evaluate the impact of the implementation of interventions performed by the clinical pharmacist.

RESULTS

A total of 271 medication errors (122.62 per 1000 patient hospital-days) were detected among the study patients (n = 228). Drug-drug interactions (70, 25.8%), guideline nonconformity (51, 18.8%), and inadequate drug monitoring (29, 11%) were the most common types of detected medication errors. Eighty-six percentage of the clinical pharmacist's interventions were implemented by prescribers. Approximately half of medication errors were intercepted before reaching to patients who received the clinical pharmacist's interventions (group A). Overall, medication errors induced 33 preventable ADEs (14.93 per 1000 patient hospital-days), of which the number of preventable ADEs was significantly greater in group B (P < 0.0001). Significantly in group B, detected medication errors initiated chains of consecutive errors when the clinical pharmacist's interventions were not accepted. Also, this group had significantly increased length of stay (P < 0.0001), number of deaths (P = 0.0312), and more than a three-fold greater number of patients intratransferring to higher levels of care (P = 0.0235; odds ratio, 3.41; 95% confidence interval, 1.08-10.8).

CONCLUSION

The clinical pharmacist-led integrated approach revealed that medication errors commonly occurred among critically ill patients, and the clinical pharmacist's interventions intercepted the majority of these medication errors. The number of preventable ADEs was significantly fewer in a group of patients who received these interventions. However, medication errors formed chains of errors that adversely affected patients' investigated outcomes in the study group with no implementation of the clinical pharmacist interventions.

Evaluation of Medication Errors in a Tertiary Care Hospital of a Low- to Middle-Income Country

Introduction Medication errors (MEs) are a major public health concern as they are detrimental to patient safety, compromise patients' confidence in the healthcare system, increase healthcare costs, and adversely affect the patient's quality of life. This is especially true in low to middle-income countries where the significance of MEs is largely undervalued. This study aims to investigate the prevalence of MEs and analyze the causes, medicines involved, reporting, and severity of MEs in a tertiary care setting. Methods A prospective observational study was conducted from March 2020 to February 2021 in a tertiary care teaching hospital in South India. The data was collected after reviewing patient medical records, by interviewing patients and healthcare professionals. National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) index was used to evaluate MEs. Results A total of 557 MEs were identified from 3798 patients with a prevalence of 14.6%. Prescribing errors were the most commonly observed ME followed by errors related to documentation of medical records, administration-related errors, and dispensing errors. Lack of time for documentation of medication records, shift change and work overload were common causes of MEs. The majority of MEs were category A and B of the NCC MERP severity index. Conclusion Antibiotics and proton pump inhibitors were the most common medicines involved in MEs. Prescribing and documentation errors were most prevalent. Implementation of systems like strict adherence to treatment guidelines, computerized provider order entry (CPOE), barcode medication administration, and closed-loop electronic medication management systems may greatly help reduce MEs. All healthcare institutions should undertake routine audits to determine the prevalence and causes of medication errors.

Evaluation of older persons' medications: a critical incident technique study exploring healthcare professionals' experiences and actions

Background

Older persons with polypharmacy are at increased risk of harm from medications. Therefore, it is important that physicians and nurses, together with the persons, evaluate medications to avoid hazardous polypharmacy. It remains unclear how healthcare professionals experience such evaluations. This study aimed to explore physicians’ and nurses’ experiences from evaluations of older persons’ medications, and their related actions to manage concerns related to the evaluations.

Method

Individual interview data from 29 physicians and nurses were collected and analysed according to the critical incident technique.

Results

The medication evaluation for older persons was influenced by the working conditions (e.g. healthcare professionals’ clinical knowledge, experiences, and situational conditions) and working in partnership (e.g. cooperating around and with the older person). Actions taken to manage these evaluations were related to working with a plan (e.g. performing day-to-day work and planning for continued treatment) and collaborative problem-solving (e.g. finding a solution, involving the older person, and communicating with colleagues).

Conclusion

Working conditions and cooperation with colleagues, the older persons and their formal or informal caregivers, emerged as important factors related to the medication evaluation. By adjusting their performance to variations in these conditions, healthcare professionals contributed to the resilience of the healthcare system by its capacity to prevent, notice and mitigate medication problems. Based on these findings, we hypothesize that a joint plan for continued treatment could facilitate such resilience, if it articulates what to observe, when to act, who should act and what actions to take in case of deviations from what is expected.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06518-w.

Prevalence of adverse drug reactions in the primary care setting: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) represent a major cause of iatrogenic morbidity and mortality in patient care. While a substantial body of work has been undertaken to characterise ADRs in the hospital setting, the overall burden of ADRs in the primary care remains unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting and factors affecting the heterogeneity of the estimates.

METHODS

Studies were identified through searching of Medline, Embase, CINAHL and IPA databases. We included observational studies that reported information on the prevalence of ADRs in patients receiving primary care. Disease and treatment specific studies were excluded. Quality of the included studies were assessed using Smyth ADRs adapted scale. A random-effects model was used to calculate the pooled estimate. Potential source of heterogeneity, including age groups, ADRs definitions, ADRs detection methods, study setting, quality of the studies, and sample size, were investigated using sub-group analysis and meta-regression.

RESULTS

Thirty-three studies with a total study population of 1,568,164 individuals were included. The pooled prevalence of ADRs in the primary care setting was 8.32% (95% CI, 7.82, 8.83). The percentage of preventable ADRs ranged from 12.35-37.96%, with the pooled estimate of 22.96% (95% CI, 7.82, 38.09). Cardiovascular system drugs were the most commonly implicated medication class. Methods of ADRs detection, age group, setting, and sample size contributed significantly to the heterogeneity of the estimates.

CONCLUSION

ADRs constitute a significant health problem in the primary care setting. Further research should focus on examining whether ADRs affect subsequent clinical outcomes, particularly in high-risk therapeutic areas. This information may better inform strategies to reduce the burden of ADRs in the primary care setting.

Patient- and Prescriber-Related Factors Associated with Potentially Inappropriate Medications and Drug-Drug Interactions in Older Adults

We aimed to evaluate the prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication (PIM) use and drug–drug interactions (DDIs) in older adults and their associated factors. This cross-sectional study used National Health Insurance data of older adults in South Korea. The 2015 AGS Beers Criteria were used to classify PIM use and DDIs. The associations of PIM use and DDIs with patient- and prescriber-related factors were evaluated using multiple logistic regression. Of the older adults who received at least one outpatient prescription (N = 1,277,289), 73.0% and 13.3% received one or more prescriptions associated with PIM use or DDIs, respectively. Chlorphenamine was most commonly associated with PIM, followed by diazepam. Co-prescriptions of corticosteroids and NSAIDs accounted for 82.8% of DDIs. Polypharmacy and mainly visiting surgeons or neurologists/psychiatrists were associated with a higher likelihood of prescriptions associated with PIM use or DDIs. Older age, high continuity of care (COC), and mainly visiting a hospital were associated with a lower likelihood of PIM use or DDIs. Prescriptions associated with PIM use and DDIS were more frequent for low COC patients or those who mainly visited clinics; therefore, patients with these characteristics are preferred intervention targets for reducing prescriptions associated with PIM use and DDIs.

Evaluation of Clinical Decision Support to Reduce Sedative-Hypnotic Prescribing in Older Adults

OBJECTIVE

We sought to characterize the performance of inpatient and outpatient computerized clinical decision support (CDS) alerts aimed at reducing inappropriate benzodiazepine and nonbenzodiazepine sedative medication prescribing in older adults 18 months after implementation.

METHODS

We reviewed the performance of two CDS alerts in the outpatient and inpatient settings in 2019. To examine the alerts' effectiveness, we analyzed metrics including overall alert adherence, provider-level adherence, and reasons for alert trigger and override.

RESULTS

In 2019, we identified a total of 14,534 and 4,834 alerts triggered in the outpatient and inpatient settings, respectively. Providers followed only 1% of outpatient and 3% of inpatient alerts. Most alerts were ignored (68% outpatient and 60% inpatient), while providers selected to override the remaining alerts. In each setting, the top 2% of clinicians were responsible for approximately 25% of all ignored or overridden alerts. However, a small proportion of clinicians (2% outpatient and 4% inpatient) followed the alert at least half of the time and accounted for a disproportionally large fraction of the total followed alerts. Our analysis of the free-text comments revealed that many alerts were to continue outpatient prescriptions or for situational anxiety.

CONCLUSION

Our findings highlight the importance of evaluation of CDS performance after implementation. We found large variation in response to the inpatient and outpatient alerts, both with respect to follow and ignore rates. Reevaluating the alert design by providing decision support by indication may be more helpful and may reduce alert fatigue.

A machine learning-based clinical decision support system to identify prescriptions with a high risk of medication error

Objective

To improve patient safety and clinical outcomes by reducing the risk of prescribing errors, we tested the accuracy of a hybrid clinical decision support system in prioritizing prescription checks.

Materials and Methods

Data from electronic health records were collated over a period of 18 months. Inferred scores at a patient level (probability of a patient’s set of active orders to require a pharmacist review) were calculated using a hybrid approach (machine learning and a rule-based expert system). A clinical pharmacist analyzed randomly selected prescription orders over a 2-week period to corroborate our findings. Predicted scores were compared with the pharmacist’s review using the area under the receiving-operating characteristic curve and area under the precision-recall curve. These metrics were compared with existing tools: computerized alerts generated by a clinical decision support (CDS) system and a literature-based multicriteria query prioritization technique. Data from 10 716 individual patients (133 179 prescription orders) were used to train the algorithm on the basis of 25 features in a development dataset.

Results

While the pharmacist analyzed 412 individual patients (3364 prescription orders) in an independent validation dataset, the areas under the receiving-operating characteristic and precision-recall curves of our digital system were 0.81 and 0.75, respectively, thus demonstrating greater accuracy than the CDS system (0.65 and 0.56, respectively) and multicriteria query techniques (0.68 and 0.56, respectively).

Discussion

Our innovative digital tool was notably more accurate than existing techniques (CDS system and multicriteria query) at intercepting potential prescription errors.

Conclusions

By primarily targeting high-risk patients, this novel hybrid decision support system improved the accuracy and reliability of prescription checks in a hospital setting.

Optimizing pharmacists' detection of prescribing errors: Comparison of on-ward and central pharmacy services

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Prescribing errors are the leading cause of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Pharmaceutical validation, defined as the review of drug orders by a pharmacist, associated with clinical decision support (CDS) systems, significantly reduces these errors and adverse drug events. In Belgium, because clinical pharmacy services have limited public financial support, most pharmaceutical validations are performed at the central pharmacy instead of on-ward, by hospital pharmacists doing dispensing activities. In that context, we aimed at evaluating whether the strategy of CDS-guided central validation was the most appropriate method to improve the quality and safety of medicines' use compared to an on-ward pharmaceutical validation.

METHODS

Our retrospective observational study was conducted in a Belgian tertiary care hospital, in 2018-2019. Data were extracted from our validation software and pharmacists' charts. The outcomes of the study were the number of pharmaceutical interventions due to the detection of prescribing errors, reasons for interventions, their acceptance rate and their potential clinical impact (according to two blinded experts) in the central pharmacy and on-ward validation groups.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Despite the use of the same CDS, a pharmaceutical intervention following the detection of a prescribing error was made for 2.9% (20/698) of central group patients and 13.3% (93/701) of on-ward patients (χ²  = 49.97, p < 0.001). Interventions made at the central pharmacy (n = 20) mostly relied on CDS-alerts (i.e. drug-drug interaction [25%] or overdosing [20%]) while interventions made on-ward (n = 93) were also for pharmacotherapy optimization (i.e. no valid indication [25%] or inappropriate drug's choice [11%]). The on-ward validation group showed a higher acceptance rate compared to the central group (84% and 65%, respectively [Fisher's test, p = 0.053]). Proportions of interventions with significant or very significant clinical impact were similar between the two groups but as fewer interventions were made centrally, a significant proportion of errors were probably not detected by the central validation.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

On-ward pharmaceutical validation leads to a higher rate of prescribing error detection. Pharmaceutical interventions made by on-ward pharmacists are also better accepted and more relevant, going further than CDS-alerts.

The Burden of Preventable Adverse Drug Events on Hospital Stay and Healthcare Costs in Japanese Pediatric Inpatients: The JADE Study

Background:

Adverse drug events (ADEs) are a burden to the healthcare system. Preventable ADEs, which was ADEs due to medication errors, could be reduced if medication errors can be prevent or ameliorate.

Objective:

We investigated the burden of preventable ADEs on the length of hospital stay (LOS) and costs, and estimated the national burden of preventable ADEs in pediatric inpatients in Japan.

Methods:

We analyzed data from the Japan Adverse Drug Events (JADE) study on pediatric patients and estimated the incidence of preventable ADEs and associated extended LOS. Costs attributable to extended LOS by preventable ADEs were calculated using a national statistics database and we calculated the effect of preventable ADEs on national cost excess.

Results:

We included 907 patients with 7377 patient-days. Among them, 31 patients (3.4%) experienced preventable ADEs during hospitalization. Preventable ADEs significantly increased the LOS by 14.1 days, adjusting for gender, age, ward, resident physician, surgery during hospitalization, cancer, and severe malformation at birth. The individual cost due to the extended LOS of 14.1 days was estimated as USD 8258. We calculated the annual extra expense for preventable ADEs in Japan as USD 329 676 760. Sensitivity analyses, considering the incidence of preventable ADEs and the length of hospital stay, showed that the expected range of annual extra expense for preventable ADEs in Japan is between USD 141 468 968 and 588 450 708.

Conclusion:

Preventable ADEs caused longer hospitalization and considerable extra healthcare costs in pediatric inpatients. Our results would encourage further efforts to prevent and ameliorate preventable ADEs.

Medication errors: a focus on nursing practice

Objectives

Health departments endeavor to give care to individuals to remain in healthy conditions. Medications errors (MEs), one of the most types of medical errors, could be venomous in clinical settings. Patients will be harmed physically and psychologically, in addition to adverse economic consequences. Reviewing and understanding the topic of medication error especially by nurses can help in advancing the medical services to patients.

Methods

A search using search engines such as PubMed and Google scholar were used in finding articles related to the review topic.

Key findings

This review highlighted the classifications of MEs, their types, outcomes, reporting process, and the strategies of error avoidance. This summary can bridge and open gates of awareness on how to deal with and prevent error occurrences. It highlights the importance of reporting strategies as mainstay prevention methods for medication errors.

Conclusions

Medication errors are classified based on multifaceted criteria and there is a need to standardize the recommendations and make them a central goal all over the globe for the best practice. Nurses are the frontlines of clinical settings, encouraged to be one integrated body to prevent the occurrence of medication errors. Thus, systemizing the guidelines are required such as education and training, independent double checks, standardized procedures, follow the five rights, documentation, keep lines of communication open, inform patients of drug they receive, follow strict guidelines, improve labeling and package format, focus on the work environment, reduce workload, ways to avoid distraction, fix the faulty system, enhancing job security for nurses, create a cultural blame-free workspace, as well as hospital administration, should support and revise processes of error reporting, and spread the awareness of the importance of reporting.

Development and Evaluation of a Web-Based Paediatric Drug Information System for Germany

Background: Off-label use is frequent in paediatrics but that does not necessarily mean that the risk-benefit ratio is negative. Nevertheless, evidence-based data is essential for safe drug therapy. In Germany, there is no publicly available compendium providing transparent, evidence-based information for paediatric pharmacotherapy to date. This work describes the development of a web-based paediatric drug information system (PDIS) for Germany and its evaluation by health care professionals (HCP). Methods: Since 2012, a PDIS is being developed by the authors and is supported by the Federal Ministry of Health since 2016. Dosing recommendations were established based on systematic literature reviews and subsequent evaluation by clinical experts. The prototype was evaluated by HCP. Based on the results, the further development was concluded. Results: 92% of HCP believed that the PDIS could improve the quality of prescribing, as currently available information is deficient. Besides the license and formulations, dosing recommendations were the most relevant modules. A dosage calculator was the most wanted improvement. To facilitate sustainability of future development, a collaboration with the Dutch Kinderformularium was established. As of 2021, the database will be available to German HCP. Conclusion: The fundamentals for a German PDIS were established, and vital steps were taken towards successful continuation.

Virtual Family-Centered Rounds in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Trial

OBJECTIVES

To measure the feasibility, reach, and potential impact of a virtual family-centered rounds (FCR) intervention in the neonatal intensive care unit.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized controlled pilot trial with a 2:1 intervention-to-control arm allocation ratio. Caregivers of intervention arm neonates were invited to participate in virtual FCR plus standard of care. We specified 5 feasibility objectives. We profiled intervention usage by neonatal and maternal characteristics. Exploratory outcomes included FCR caregiver attendance, length of stay, breast milk feeding at discharge, caregiver experience, and medical errors. We performed descriptive analyses to calculate proportions, means, and rates with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

We included 74 intervention and 36 control subjects. Three of the five feasibility objectives were met based on the point estimates. The recruitment and intervention uptake objectives were not achieved. Among intervention arm subjects, recruitment of a caregiver occurred for 47 (63.5%, 95% CI 51.5%-74.4%) neonates. Caregiver use of the intervention occurred for 36 (48.6%, 95% CI 36.8%-60.6%) neonates in the intervention arm. Feasibility objectives assessing technical issues, burden, and data collection were achieved. Among the attempted virtual encounters, 95.0% (95% CI 91.5%-97.3%) had no technical issues. The survey response rate was 87.5% (95% CI 78.2%-93.8%). Intervention arm neonates had 3.36 (95% CI 2.66%-4.23) times the FCR caregiver attendance rate of subjects in the control arm.

CONCLUSIONS

A randomized trial to compare virtual FCR to standard of care in neonatal subjects is feasible and has potential to improve patient and caregiver outcomes.

Harm Prevalence Due to Medication Errors Involving High-Alert Medications: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to determine the prevalence and main types of harm caused by high-alert medication after medication errors (MEs) in hospitals.

METHOD

A literature systematic review was conducted on PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Lilacs. Eligible studies published until June 2017 were included.

RESULT

Of 6244 studies identified through searching four electronic databases, five studies meeting the selection criteria of this study were analyzed. There was wide variation in the overall prevalence of harm due to MEs involving HAM, from 3.8% to 100%, whereas the pooled prevalence was 16.3%. Overall, 0.01% of harm caused by MEs involving HAM resulted in death. The severity of errors ranged from 0.1% to 19.2% for moderate errors, 0.2% to 15.4% for serious errors, and 1.9% lethal to the patients. The highest prevalences of harm occurred after errors involving potassium chloride 15%, insulin, and epoprostenol. The lowest prevalence of harm was related to errors of anticoagulants administration. The methodological heterogeneity limited direct comparisons among the studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Of the 15 drugs on the list of Institute for Safe Medication Practices HAMs in the United States and Brazil, nine did not present scientific evidence of the potential for harm. In general, few studies, characterized by methodological and conceptual heterogeneity, were performed to determine the harm prevalence resulting from errors involving these drugs.