Nature and frequency of medication errors in a geriatric ward: an Indonesian experience

Dispensing error rates in pharmacy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES

Dispensing errors can cause preventable patient harm such as adverse drug events, hospitalisation, or death. The aim of this study was to systematically review the literature and quantify the global prevalence of dispensing errors across pharmacy settings.

METHODS

Electronic databases including EMBASE, MEDLINE, and CINAHL were searched between January 2010 and September 2023. Studies published in English, from all pharmacy settings, with data that could be used to calculate the prevalence of dispensing errors were included. Studies were excluded if they did not report true dispensing errors. Data including study characteristics and dispensing error characteristics were extracted. The quality of the studies was assessed using 10 criteria. Random-effects meta-analysis was employed to estimate pooled prevalences and heterogeneity was quantified using the I2 statistic. Subgroup analyses were performed according to sample size, study design, setting, error identification method, location, and study quality.

PROSPERO

CRD42020197860.

RESULTS

Of the 4216 articles, 62 studies were included. Hospital was the most common pharmacy setting (n = 44, 71.0%) and 15 studies were based in the community. The type of denominator used to report dispensing errors varied between studies, such as dispensed items (n = 45, 72.6%), doses (n = 7, 11.3%), or patients (n = 5, 8.1%). The prevalence of dispensing errors ranged from 0 to 33.3% (n = 62 studies with 64 prevalence estimates). The pooled prevalence for dispensing errors across all studies was 1.6% (95% CI 1.2%-2.1%, I2 = 100%). A majority of studies were of moderate methodological quality (n = 36, 58.1%) and interrater reliability was applied in eight studies.

CONCLUSIONS

The worldwide prevalence of dispensing errors was 1.6% across community, hospital and other pharmacy settings. This varied depending on the type of denominator used, study design and how the error was identified. This review highlights the need for consistent definitions and standardised classifications of dispensing errors worldwide to reduce heterogeneity.

Frequency of Medication Administration Timing Error in Hospitals: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Medication administration timing error (MATE) leads to poor medication efficacy, harm, and death. Frequency of MATE is understudied.

PURPOSE

To determine MATE frequency, and characteristics and quality of reporting studies.

METHODS

A systematic review of articles between 1999 and 2021 was conducted using the Cumulative Index of Nursing and Allied Health Literature, ProQuest, and PubMed databases. Articles were scored for quality using the STROBE (Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology) checklist.

RESULTS

Initially, 494 articles were screened; 23 were included in this review. MATE was defined as administration beyond 60 minutes before or after the scheduled time in 13 (57%) of the included studies. Measurement procedures included data abstraction, self-report, and observation. Frequency of MATE was 1% to 72.6%. Moderate study quality was found in 78% of articles.

CONCLUSION

Research on MATE is characterized by inconsistent definitions, measurements procedures, and calculation techniques. High-quality studies are lacking. Many research improvement opportunities exist.

Prevalence of medication administration errors in hospitalized adults: A systematic review and meta-analysis up to 2017 to explore sources of heterogeneity

Previous estimates to meta-analyze administration error rates were limited by the high statistical heterogeneity, restricting their use. This study aimed to investigate sources of heterogeneity in pooled administration error rates in hospitalized adults. We systematically searched scientific databases up to November 2017 for studies presenting error rates/relevant numerical data in hospitalized adults. We conducted separate meta-analyses for the numerators: One Medication Error (OME) (each dose can be correct or incorrect) and Total Number of Errors (TNE) (more than one error per dose could be counted), using the generic inverse variance with a 95% confidence interval. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I² and Cochran's Q test. We meta-analyzed 33 studies. The global pooled analyses based on the OME and TNE numerators showed very high heterogeneity (I²  = 100%; p < 0.00001). For each meta-analysis, subgroup analyses based on study characteristics (countries, wards, population, routes of administration, error detection methods, and medications) yielded results with consistently elevated heterogeneity. Beyond these characteristics, we stratified the studies according to the mean error prevalence level as the threshold. Based on the OME numerator, we identified two subgroups of low (0.15[0.13-0.17]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.43) and high (0.26[0.24-0.27]; I²  = 38%; p = 0.17) pooled prevalence rates, with controlled heterogeneity. Similarly, for the TNE numerator, we identified two subgroups of low (0.10[0.09-0.10]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.76) and high (0.28[0.27-0.29]; I²  = 0%; p = 0.89) pooled prevalence rates, with controlled heterogeneity. These subgroups differed regarding the denominators used: Total opportunities for errors versus others (doses, observations, administrations). Calculation methods, specifically the denominator, seem a primary factor in explaining heterogeneity in error rates. Standardizing numerators, denominators, and definitions is necessary.

Impact of hospital readiness on patient safety incidents during the COVID-19 pandemic in Indonesia: health worker perceptions

OBJECTIVES

This study examined the impact of hospital readiness on patient safety from the healthcare workers' perspective.

DESIGN

The study employed a mixed-methods explanatory sequential design, with the quantitative phase taking precedence. We conducted an online survey of 235 healthcare workers at COVID-19 referral hospitals, followed by an interview with 11 participants from various hospital types.

SETTING

COVID-19 referral hospitals in Indonesia.

PARTICIPANTS

Health workers working at COVID-19 referral hospitals.

MEASURES

Hospital ownership; hospital accreditation status; hospital readiness including incident management system, surge capacity, infection control and prevention, and human resource management; patient safety incident.

RESULTS

According to the survey, 66.4% of the participants worked at a hospital owned by the provincial or district government, and 69.4% worked at a hospital which had received an excellent status accreditation. More than 80% of the hospitals scored well in the categories of the incident management system (86%), surge capacity (80.9%), infection control and prevention (97.9%), and human resource management (84.7%). However, only 50.6% of the hospitals scored well in managing patient safety incidents. Hospital ownership, accreditation status and hospital readiness all have an impact on patient safety incidents, which were reported in all types of hospitals by both studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides significant results for Indonesia in terms of hospital preparedness and patient safety for the COVID-19 pandemic. The accreditation and ownership status of the hospital have aided hospital readiness. Despite the fact that no hospital in the world was prepared for the COVID-19 pandemic, hospital readiness has improved a year later; however, patient safety has not improved. Patient safety incidents occurred regardless of hospital status, with the most common occurrence being delayed treatment. Administrative errors were also recorded in COVID-19 field hospitals that were not accredited. Future research should focus on improving pandemic care quality and implementing initiatives that are applicable to all types of hospitals.

A cross-sectional study on prescribing and dispensing errors at a corporate hospital in South India

BACKGROUND

The substantial and increasing use of medications escalating the risk of harm globally. The serious medication errors in hospital and community settings resulting from patient injury and death. Hence, a cross-sectional study was aimed to analyse the prescribing and dispensing errors in the outpatient departments of a south Indian hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective cross-sectional study was carried out to evaluate the prescribing, and dispensing errors in outpatients who seek patient counseling at the tertiary care multispecialty hospital. The data were collected from various sources such as patient's prescriptions and dispensing records from the pharmacy.

RESULTS

A total of 500 prescriptions were screened and identified 65.60% of prescriptions with at least any one type of medication errors. Out of 328 prescriptions, 96.04% were handwritten and 3.96% were computerised prescriptions. Among the 328 prescriptions with medication errors, 32.62% noticed prescribing errors, 37.80% with dispensing errors, and 29.58% with both prescribing and dispensing errors. Out of these 328 prescriptions, 74.09% prescriptions were found to have polypharmacy.

DISCUSSION

Medication errors are serious problems in healthcare and can be a source of significant morbidity and mortality in healthcare settings. The present study showed that dispensing errors were the most common among the types of medication errors, in these particularly wrong directions were the most common types of errors.

CONCLUSION

This study concludes that the overall prevalence of medication errors was around 80%, but there were no life-threatening events observed. A clinical pharmacist can play a major role in this situation appears to be a strong intervention and early detection and prevention of medication errors and thus can improve the quality of care to the patients.

Knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals on prescribing errors

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to evaluate the knowledge and attitudes of healthcare professionals on prescribing errors.

METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study employing a questionnaire that consisted of 12 items on knowledge and 10 items on healthcare professionals' attitudes toward errors in prescribing process. The participants responded to the questionnaire with a 5-Likert scale of agreement. The domains assessed in the questionnaire were respondents' knowledge and attitudes on prescribing errors, professionals responsible for the errors, and professionals' competence on drug dose adjustment. Additionally, the questionnaire had two case scenarios to further assess the healthcare professionals' knowledge of prescribing errors. There were 300 questionnaires administered to physicians, nurses, and pharmacists who attended conferences in Denpasar from July to October 2019.

RESULTS

There were 30 physicians, 58 nurses, and 69 pharmacists who responded to the survey. A response rate of 52.3% (157/300) was obtained. All healthcare professionals agreed that errors may occur in prescribing, dispensing, and administration process. All healthcare professionals understood that physician is responsible for ensuring drug safety in prescribing process and also supported a standardized form on drugs which may need drug dose personalization. Concerning item on the importance of collaboration in drug dose adjustment, although the healthcare professionals agreed on the statement, they had significant differences on the level agreement on the statement (p=0.029). The healthcare professionals also supported having regular training on drug dose adjustment based on individual patients' regimentation. The healthcare professionals' responses showed that the significant differences found on the statement of healthcare professionals should have competency on personalized dose calculation (p<0.001). All healthcare professionals agreed that physicians should have competency on drug dose adjustment, yet physicians showed less agreement that other health professionals should have the competency.

CONCLUSIONS

All healthcare professionals understood that medication errors may occur during the prescribing process but showed different attitudes on professionals who had competence in drug dose calculation. They emphasize the need to have a standardized prescription format for medication with dose changes. The respondents also recommend having regular training on medication safety for healthcare professionals.

Development and Psychometric Validation of a Questionnaire to Evaluate Knowledge and Attitude Towards Medication Error Reporting Among Pharmacists

Purpose

Assessment of medication errors (ME) is crucial to improving the quality of health care. A questionnaire that can be used to explore pharmacists’ perspectives regarding ME would be very useful as part of an ongoing process of quality improvement in patient care. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a questionnaire to measure perceived causes of ME and attitude towards ME reporting among pharmacists.

Methods

The questionnaire was developed from the literature together with outcomes from focus group discussions. It was divided into two domains which are knowledge on ME and attitude towards ME reporting. Content validity index (I-CVI), exploratory factor analysis (EFA), Cronbach alpha and intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) to assess test–retest reliability were obtained during the validation process.

Results

Overall Cronbach alpha for internal consistency was good (0.742), where subscale of the questionnaire demonstrated adequate internal consistency, with Cronbach alpha value 0.83 for knowledge and 0.70 for reporting behaviour attitude. The I-CVI showed good scores (knowledge=0.88) and (attitude=0.81), while ICC was moderately accepted with a value of 0.77. Two factors were extracted from the 16 items in EFA.

Conclusion

The questionnaire to assess knowledge on ME and attitude towards ME reporting among pharmacists is valid and reliable. It demonstrates good psychometric properties.

Polypharmacy leads to increased prevalence of potentially inappropriate medication in the Indonesian geriatric population visiting primary care facilities

Background

The geriatric population is particularly vulnerable to being prescribed potentially inappropriate medication (PIM); however, the prevalence of this occurrence remains poorly investigated in Indonesia. Thus in this research, we focused on investigating the prevalence and predictors of PIM among the Indonesian geriatric population in a primary health care setting.

Methods

A retrospective observational study was conducted in 25 primary health care facilities in Karawang District, Indonesia. The medical prescriptions of patients aged ≥60 years during January–December 2014 were documented, and the PIM was assessed based on Beers and McLeod criteria. The influence of age, sex, number of diseases, and polypharmacy toward PIM was assessed using a logistic regression model. A P-value of <0.05 defined statistical significance.

Results

A total of 3,819 subjects were included in the study. PIM was highly prevalent (52.2%) among the Indonesian elderly. Chlorpheniramine, mefenamic acid, ibuprofen, and nifedipine were the most commonly prescribed PIM. Polypharmacy (odds ratio: 1.2 [0.6, 2.1]) was the only factor associated with the use of PIM, while sex, age, and multiple diseases did not show significant association.

Conclusion

PIM is a concern in the Indonesian geriatric population. Health care professionals are encouraged to review the medications of their geriatric patients using updated safety guidelines to prevent risks associated with PIM.

Incidence of adverse drug events in public and private hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia: the (ADESA) prospective cohort study

OBJECTIVES

To determine the incidence of adverse drug events (ADEs) and assess their severity and preventability in four Saudi hospitals.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

The study included patients admitted to medical, surgical and intensive care units (ICUs) of four hospitals in Saudi Arabia. These hospitals include a 900-bed tertiary teaching hospital, a 400-bed private hospital, a 1400-bed large government hospital and a 350-bed small government hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

All patients (≥12 years) admitted to the study units over 4 months.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Incidents were collected by pharmacists and reviewed by independent clinicians. Reviewers classified the identified incidents as ADEs, potential ADEs (PADEs) or medication errors and then determined their severity and preventability.

RESULTS

We followed 4041 patients from admission to discharge. Of these, 3985 patients had complete data for analysis. The mean±SD age of patients in the analysed cohort was 43.4±19.0 years. A total of 1676 ADEs were identified by pharmacists during the medical chart review. Clinician reviewers accepted 1531 (91.4%) of the incidents identified by the pharmacists (245 ADEs, 677 PADEs and 609 medication errors with low risk of causing harm). The incidence of ADEs was 6.1 (95% CI 5.4 to 6.9) per 100 admissions and 7.9 (95% CI 6.9 to 8.9) per 1000 patient-days. The occurrence of ADEs was most common in ICUs (149 (60.8%)) followed by medical (67 (27.3%)) and surgical (29 (11.8%)) units. In terms of severity, 129 (52.7%) of the ADEs were significant, 91 (37.1%) were serious, 22 (9%) were life-threatening and three (1.2%) were fatal.

CONCLUSIONS

We found that ADEs were common in Saudi hospitals, especially in ICUs, causing significant morbidity and mortality. Future studies should focus on investigating the root causes of ADEs at the prescribing stage, and development and testing of interventions to minimise harm from medications.

Medication safety in neonatal care: a review of medication errors among neonates

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to describe the medication errors in hospitalized patients, comparing those in neonates with medication errors across the age spectrum.

METHOD

In tier 1, PubMed, Embase and Google Scholar were searched, using selected MeSH terms relating to hospitalized paediatric, adult and elderly populations. Tier 2 involved a search of the same electronic databases for literature relating to hospitalized neonatal patients.

RESULTS

A total of 58 articles were reviewed. Medication errors were well documented in each patient group. Overall, prescribing and administration errors were most commonly identified across each population, and mostly related to errors in dosing. Errors due to patient misidentification and overdosing were particularly prevalent in neonates, with 47% of administration errors involving at least tenfold overdoses. Unique errors were identified in elderly patients, comprising duplication of therapy and unnecessary prescribing of medicines. Overall, the medicines most frequently identified with error across each patient group included: heparin, antibiotics, insulin, morphine and parenteral nutrition. While neonatal patients experience the same types of medication errors as other hospitalized patients, the medication-use process within this group is more complex and has greater consequences resulting from error. Suggested strategies to help overcome medication error most commonly involved the integration of a clinical pharmacist into the treating team.

CONCLUSION

This review highlights that each step of the medication-use process is prone to error across the age spectrum. Further research is required to develop targeted strategies relevant to specific patient groups that integrate key pharmacy services into wards.

Medication Errors in the Southeast Asian Countries: A Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

Medication error (ME) is a worldwide issue, but most studies on ME have been undertaken in developed countries and very little is known about ME in Southeast Asian countries. This study aimed systematically to identify and review research done on ME in Southeast Asian countries in order to identify common types of ME and estimate its prevalence in this region.

METHODS

The literature relating to MEs in Southeast Asian countries was systematically reviewed in December 2014 by using; Embase, Medline, Pubmed, ProQuest Central and the CINAHL. Inclusion criteria were studies (in any languages) that investigated the incidence and the contributing factors of ME in patients of all ages.

RESULTS

The 17 included studies reported data from six of the eleven Southeast Asian countries: five studies in Singapore, four in Malaysia, three in Thailand, three in Vietnam, one in the Philippines and one in Indonesia. There was no data on MEs in Brunei, Laos, Cambodia, Myanmar and Timor. Of the seventeen included studies, eleven measured administration errors, four focused on prescribing errors, three were done on preparation errors, three on dispensing errors and two on transcribing errors. There was only one study of reconciliation error. Three studies were interventional.

DISCUSSION

The most frequently reported types of administration error were incorrect time, omission error and incorrect dose. Staff shortages, and hence heavy workload for nurses, doctor/nurse distraction, and misinterpretation of the prescription/medication chart, were identified as contributing factors of ME. There is a serious lack of studies on this topic in this region which needs to be addressed if the issue of ME is to be fully understood and addressed.

Patient safety and quality of care in developing countries in Southeast Asia: a systematic literature review

OBJECTIVE

To establish current knowledge of patient safety and quality of care in developing countries in Southeast Asia, current interventions and the knowledge gaps.

STUDY DESIGN

Systematic review and narrative synthesis.

DATA SOURCES

Key words, synonyms and subject headings were used to search seven electronic databases in addition to manual searching of relevant journals.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Titles and abstracts of publications between 1990 and 2014 were screened by two reviewers and checked by a third. Full text articles were screened against the eligibility criteria. Data on design, methods and key findings were extracted and synthesized.

RESULTS

Four inter-related safety and quality concerns were evident from 33 publications: (i) the risk of patient infection in healthcare delivery, (ii) medications errors/use, (iii) the quality and provision of maternal and perinatal care and (iv) the quality of healthcare provision overall.

CONCLUSIONS

Large-scale prevalence studies are needed to identify the full range of safety and quality problems in developing countries in Southeast Asia. Sharing lessons learnt from extensive quality and safety work conducted in industrialized nations may contribute to significant improvements. Yet the applicability of interventions utilized in developed countries to the political and social context in this region must be considered. Strategies to facilitate the collection of robust safety and quality data in the context of limited resources and the local context in each country are needed.