Background Hospital pharmacists and pharmacy technicians play a major role in detecting prescribing errors by medication surveillance. At present the frequency of detected and correctly handled prescribing errors is unclear, as are factors associated with correct handling. Objective To examine the frequency of detection of prescribing errors and the frequency of correct handling, as well as factors associated with correct handling of prescribing errors by hospital pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. Setting This study was conducted in 57 Dutch hospital pharmacies. Method Prospective observational study with test patients, using a case–control design to identify factors associated with correct handling. A questionnaire was used to collect the potential factors. Test patients containing prescribing errors were developed by an expert panel of hospital pharmacists (a total of 40 errors in nine medication records divided among three test patients; each test patient was used in 3 rounds; on average 4.5 prescribing error per patient per round). Prescribing errors were defined as dosing errors or therapeutic errors (contra-indication, drug–drug interaction, (pseudo)duplicate medication). The errors were selected on relevance and unequivocalness. The panel also defined how the errors should be handled in practice using national guidelines and this was defined as ‘correct handling’. The test patients had to be treated as real patients while conducting medication surveillance. The pharmacists and technicians were asked to report detected errors to the investigator. Main outcome measure The percentages of detected and correctly handled prescribing errors were the main outcome measures. Factors associated with correct handling were determined, using multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results Fifty-nine percent of the total number of intentionally added prescribing errors were detected and 57 % were handled correctly by the hospital pharmacists and technicians. The use of a computer system for medication surveillance compared to no computer system was independently associated with correct handling [odds ratio (OR) 15.39 (95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.62–65.50] for computerized physician order entry system; OR 15.40 (95 % CI 3.61–65.70) for order entry by pharmacy technicians), but because the reference category contained only one hospital these results can’t be interpreted. Furthermore, manual screening of dosages in children with or without computerized surveillance compared to no dosage checks for children [OR 2.02 (95 % CI 1.06–3.84)], qualified pharmacy technicians compared to no qualified pharmacy technicians [OR 1.32 (95 % CI 1.03–1.67)] and pharmacy technicians using protocols compared to ones not using protocols [OR 1.30 (95 % CI 1.04–1.61)] were independently associated with correct handling. Conclusion This study showed that the quality of medication surveillance in Dutch hospital pharmacies can be subject to improvement and the identified factors may give direction to such improvements.
Computerized physician order entry system Hospital pharmacist Medication surveillance Netherlands Potentially inappropriate medication Presciption errors Quality
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
We would like to thank all participating hospital pharmacies. Robert ten Broeke is kindly acknowledged for joining the authors of this article in contributing to the development of the cases as a member of the expert panel.
Conflicts of interest
No author reported any conflicts of interest.
Boyko WL Jr, Yurkowski PJ, Ivey MF, Armitstead JA, Roberts BL. Pharmacist influence on economic and morbidity outcomes in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997;54:1591–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Kaboli PJ, Hoth AB, McClimon BJ, Schnipper JL. Clinical pharmacists and inpatient medical care: a systematic review. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:955–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buurma H, De Smet PA, Leufkens HG, Egberts AC. Evaluation of the clinical value of pharmacists’ modifications of prescription errors. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;58:503–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kohn L, Corrigan J, Donaldson M, editors. To err is human—building a safer health system. Washington, DC: Institute of Medicine, National Academy Press; 2000. ISBN 0-309-26174-0.Google Scholar
Otero P, Leyton A, Ceriani Cernadas JM, Mariani G, Patient Safety Committee. Medication errors in pediatric inpatients: prevalence and results of a prevention program. Pediatrics. 2008;122:e737–43.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Gijssel-Wiersma DG, Van den Bemt PM, Walenbergh-van Veen MC. Influence of computerised medication charts on medication errors in a hospital. Drug Saf. 2005;28:1119–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van den Bemt PM, Egberts TC, de Jong-van den Berg LT, Brouwers JR. Drug-related problems in hospitalized patients—a review. Drug Saf. 2000;22:321–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kopp BJ, Erstad BL, Allen ME, Theodorou AA, Priestley G. Medication errors and adverse drug events in an intensive care unit: direct observation approach for detection. Crit Care Med. 2006;34:415–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krähenbühl-Melcher A, Schlienger R, Lampert M, Haschke M, Drewe J, Krähenbühl S. Drug-related problems in hospitals: a review of the recent literature. Drug Saf. 2007;30:379–407.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Berdot S, Sabatier B, Gillaizeau F, Caruba T, Prognon P, Durieux P. Evaluation of drug administration errors in a teaching hospital. BMC Health Serv Res. 2012;12:60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fernandez-Llamazares CM, Calleja-Hernández MA, Manrique-Rodríguez S, Pérez-Sanz C, Durán-García E, Sanjurjo-Sáez M. Prescribing errors intercepted by clinical pharmacists in paediatrics and obstetrics in a tertiary hospital in Spain. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2012;68:1339–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean Franklin B, Vincent C, Schachter M, Barber N. The incidence of prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: an overview of the research methods. Drug Saf. 2005;28:891–900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean B, Schachter M, Vincent C, Barber N. Prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: their incidence and clinical significance. Qual Saf Health Care. 2002;11:340–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schiff GD, Klass D, Peterson J, Shah G, Bates DW. Linking laboratory and pharmacy: opportunities for reducing errors and improving care. Arch Intern Med. 2003;163:893–900.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harinstein LM, Kane-Gill SL, Smithburger PL, Culley CM, Reddy VK, Seybert AL. Use of an abnormal laboratory value-drug combination alert to detect drug-induced thrombocytopenia in critically Ill patients. J Crit Care. 2012;27:242–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koppel R, Metlay JP, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, et al. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA. 2005;293:1197–203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Sijs H, Aarts J, Vulto A, Berg M. Overriding of drug safety alerts in computerized physician order entry. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2006;13:138–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jani YH, Barber N, Wong IC. Characteristics of clinical decision support alert overrides in an electronic prescribing system at a tertiary care paediatric hospital. Int J Pharm Pract. 2011;19:363–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leape LL, Cullen DJ, Clapp MD, Burdick E, Demonaco HJ, Erickson JI, et al. Pharmacist participation on physician rounds and adverse drug events in the intensive care unit. JAMA. 1999;282:267–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt DL, Haynes RB, Hanna SE, Smith K. Effects of computer-based clinical decision support systems on physician performance and patient outcomes: a systematic review. JAMA. 1998;280:1339–46.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Roon EN, Flikweert S, le Comte M, Langendijk PN, Kwee-Zuiderwijk WJ, Smits P, et al. Clinical relevance of drug–drug interactions: a structured assessment procedure. Drug Saf. 2005;28:1131–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van der Sijs H, Bouamar R, van Gelder T, Aarts J, Berg M, Vulto A. Functionality test for drug safety alerting in computerized physician order entry systems. Int J Med Inform. 2010;79:243–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thies BJ, Van der Hoeven RT, Egberts AC. Patient interventions in the Dutch hospital pharmacy. Pharm Weekbl. 2003;138:1318–22 (in Dutch).Google Scholar
Donyai P, O’Grady K, Jacklin A, Barber N, Franklin BD. The effects of electronic prescribing on the quality of prescribing. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2008;65:230–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sanghera N, Chan PY, Khaki ZF, Planner C, Lee KK, Cranswick NE, et al. Interventions of hospital pharmacists in improving drug therapy in children: a systematic literature review. Drug Saf. 2006;29:1031–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kadmon G, Bron-Harlev E, Nahum E, Schiller O, Haski G, Shonfeld T. Computerized order entry with limited decision support to prevent prescription errors in a PICU. Pediatrics. 2009;124:935–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaughnessy AF, D’Amico F. Long-term experience with a program to improve prescription-writing skills. Fam Med. 1994;26:168–71 (Abstract).PubMedGoogle Scholar