Advertisement

Drug Safety

, Volume 37, Issue 5, pp 351–359 | Cite as

A Comparison of the Effects of Different Typographical Methods on the Recognizability of Printed Drug Names

  • Calvin K. L. OrEmail author
  • Hailiang Wang
Original Research Article

Abstract

Background

Tall Man lettering is a text enhancement method currently recommended by various organizations for distinguishing look-alike drug names to prevent medication errors. However, the literature has suggested that other typographic styles may be more effective.

Objective

Our objective was to examine the effects of text enhancements and orthographic similarity on the accuracy of look-alike drug name differentiation.

Methods

We conducted two experiments that were based on a two-way, repeated-measures design with text enhancement (Tall Man, boldface, boldface plus Tall Man, colored text [red] and contrast with lowercase as a ‘no text enhancement’ control) and orthographic similarity (low, medium, and high) as factors. Engineering students without a pharmacy background in experiment 1 (n = 40) and student pharmacists in experiment 2 (n = 40) participated in a computer-based drug name differentiation task in which they determined whether the two drug names in each of the 336 name pairs were the same or different. Only the data generated from the pairs in which the two names were different were used in the analysis. The differentiation accuracy was measured as the proportion of correct responses.

Results

In both experiments, all five text enhancements significantly improved accuracy compared with the lowercase condition; and boldface plus Tall Man and color significantly outperformed Tall Man lettering. A high degree of orthographic similarity yielded the least accuracy, followed by medium and low degrees.

Conclusions

Highlighting the differing portions of confusing drug name pairs using enhanced text clearly renders differentiation easier, although Tall Man lettering may not be the most effective choice for this method.

Keywords

Visual Search Medication Error Pair Stimulus Differentiation Accuracy Stroke Width 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the matching fund granted by the Faculty of Engineering and the Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems Engineering at the University of Hong Kong (Grant #: 006010013, PI: Calvin Or). The authors are grateful to all the participants for their time.

Conflict of interest

Calvin K. L. Or and Hailiang Wang have no conflicts of interest that are directly relevant to the content of this study.

Supplementary material

40264_2014_156_MOESM1_ESM.docx (24 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 24 kb)
40264_2014_156_MOESM2_ESM.docx (69 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 69 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Hoffman JM, Proulx SM. Medication errors caused by confusion of drug names. Drug Saf. 2003;26(7):445–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hampton T. Similar drug names a risky prescription. J Am Med Assoc. 2004;291(16):1948–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Aronson JK. Confusion over similar drug names: problems and solutions. Drug Saf. 1995;12(3):155–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Norton Rose Fulbright. Increased regulation of pharmaceutical trade marks; 2013. http://www.nortonrosefulbright.com/files/increased-regulation-of-pharmaceutical-trademarks-pdf-102024.pdf. Accessed 18 March 2014.
  5. 5.
    HAI Europe/International Society of Drug Bulletins/Medicines in Europe Forum. The European Medicines Agency Road Map to 2015: Independence should be the priority; 2010. http://www.isdbweb.org/documents/uploads/press/JointAns_EMAFiveYearPlan2010.pdf. Accessed 8 March 2014.
  6. 6.
    Zhani EE. Joint Commission issues new sentinel event alert: safe use of Opioids in hospitals. The Joint Commission; 2012, August 8. http://www.jointcommission.org/sentinel_event_alert_safe_use_of_opioids_in_hospitals/. Accessed 15 March 2014.
  7. 7.
    US Food and Drug Administration. Name Differentiation Project. 2001. http://www.fda.gov/drugs/drugsafety/medicationerrors/ucm164587.htm. Accessed 3 March 2014.
  8. 8.
    Institute for Safe Medication Practices. Use of Tall Man letter is gaining wide acceptance. ISMP Med Saf Alert. 2008;13:1–3.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grissinger M. Tall man letters are gaining wide acceptance. Pharm Ther. 2012;37(3):132–3.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Filik R, Price J, Darker I, Gerrett D, Purdy K, Gale A. The influence of Tall Man lettering on drug name confusion: a laboratory-based investigation in the UK using younger and older adults and healthcare practitioners. Drug Saf. 2010;33(8):677–87.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Filik R, Purdy K, Gale A, Gerrett D. Drug name confusion: evaluating the effectiveness of capital (“Tall Man”) letters using eye movement data. Soc Sci Med. 2004;59(12):2597–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Darker IT, Gerret D, Filik R, Purdy KJ, Gale AG. The influence of ‘Tall Man’ lettering on errors of visual perception in the recognition of written drug names. Ergonomics. 2011;54(1):21–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Filik R, Purdy K, Gale A, Gerrett D. Labeling of medicines and patient safety: evaluating methods of reducing drug name confusion. Hum Factors. 2006;48(1):39–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Schell KL. Using enhanced text to facilitate recognition of drug names: evidence from two experimental studies. Appl Ergon. 2009;40(1):82–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gabriele S. The role of typography in differentiating look-alike/sound-alike drug names. Healthc Q. 2006;9:88–95.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Irwin A, Mearns K, Watson M, Urquhart J. The effect of proximity, Tall Man lettering, and time pressure on accurate visual perception of drug names. Hum Factors. 2013;55(2):253–66.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wolfe J. Visual search. In: Pashler H, editor. Attention. East Sussex: Psychology Press; 1998. p. 13–73.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Yantis S. Control of visual attention. In: Pashler H, editor. Attention. East Sussex: Psychology Press; 1998. p. 223–56.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Luckiesh M, Moss FK. Boldness as a factor in type-design and typography. J Appl Psychol. 1940;24(2):170–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bradley B, Singleton M, Li WPA. Readability of patient information leaflets on over-the-counter (OTC) medicines. J Clin Pharm Ther. 1994;19(1):7–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sheedy JE, Subbaram MV, Zimmerman AB, Hayes JR. Text legibility and the letter superiority effect. Hum Factors. 2005;47(4):797–815.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Joint Commission of Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. Sound-alike drug names produce risk of medication interchange errors. J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother. 2005;19(3):47–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lambert BL, Chang KY, Lin SJ. Effect of orthographic and phonological similarity on false recognition of drug names. Soc Sci Med. 2001;52(12):1843–57.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hellier E, Edworthy J, Derbyshire N, Costello A. Considering the impact of medicine label design characteristics on patient safety. Ergonomics. 2006;49(5–6):617–30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Lambert BL. Predicting look-alike and sound-alike medication errors. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1997;54(10):1161–71.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Kondrak G, Dorr B. Automatic identification of confusable drug names. Artif Intell Med. 2006;36(1):29–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Institute for Safe Medication Practices. FDA and ISMP lists of look-alike drug names with recommended Tall Man letters; 2011. http://www.ismp.org/tools/tallmanletters.pdf. Accessed 3 March 2014.
  28. 28.
    Emmerton LM, Rizk MF. Look-alike and sound-alike medicines: risks and ‘solutions’. Int J Clin Pharm. 2012;34(1):4–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Lambert BL, Lin SJ, Tan HK. Designing safe drug names. Drug Saf. 2005;28(6):495–512.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Flynn EA, Barker KN, Carnahan BJ. National observational study of prescription dispensing accuracy and safety in 50 pharmacies. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2003;43(2):191–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Aronson JK. Medication errors resulting from the confusion of drug names. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2004;3(3):167–72.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    McCoy LK. Look-alike, sound-alike drugs review: include look-alike packaging as an additional safety check. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2005;31(1):47–53.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Filik R, Purdy K, Gale A. Medication errors and the judicious use of colour on the labelling of medicines. Contemporary Ergonomics 2004. CRC Press; 2004.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Cohen MR. Medication errors. 2nd ed. Washington, D.C.: American Pharmacists Association; 2007.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fisher DL, Coury BG, Tengs TO, Duffy SA. Minimizing the time to search visual displays: the role of highlighting. Hum Factors. 1989;31(2):167–82.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Wickens CD, Hollands JG. Engineering psychology and human performance. 3rd ed. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall; 1999.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fung EY, Leung B. Do automated dispensing machines improve patient safety? Can J Hosp Pharm. 2009;62(6):516–7.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems EngineeringThe University of Hong KongPokfulamHong Kong
  2. 2.Department of Industrial and Manufacturing Systems EngineeringThe University of Hong KongPokfulamHong Kong

Personalised recommendations