The overall rates of dispensing errors and potential ADEs substantially decreased after implementing bar code technology. However, the technology should be configured to scan every dose during the dispensing process.

No abstract

Technology has great potential to reduce medication errors in hospitals. This case report describes barriers to, and facilitators of, the implementation of a pharmacy bar code scanning system to reduce medication dispensing errors at a large academic medical center. Ten pharmacy staff were interviewed about their experiences during the implementation. Interview notes were iteratively reviewed to identify common themes. The authors identified three main barriers to pharmacy bar code scanning system implementation: process (training requirements and process flow issues), technology (hardware, software, and the role of vendors), and resistance (communication issues, changing roles, and negative perceptions about technology). The authors also identified strategies to overcome these barriers. Adequate training, continuous improvement, and adaptation of workflow to address one's own needs mitigated process barriers. Ongoing vendor involvement, acknowledgment of technology limitations, and attempts to address them were crucial in overcoming technology barriers. Staff resistance was addressed through clear communication, identifying champions, emphasizing new information provided by the system, and facilitating collaboration.

Objectives To establish the nature of medication errors occurring within community pharmacy and analyse common error patterns. To identify factors which influence the occurrence of medication errors and near misses, with the intention of designing systems or strategies to reduce the occurrence of these events. Setting Fifteen community pharmacies situated within Brighton and Hove City Primary Care Trust, East Sussex, between January and March 2004. Method A self-reporting form was designed, piloted and administered to pharmacists, which gathered information on the detection of an error or near miss in the dispensing process. Key findings One-hundred and thirteen near misses and thirty-two medication errors were reported. The majority of near misses were detected by the pharmacist at the final check, and the majority of medication errors were detected by the patient or patient's representative. Selection errors were most common, with similar drug names and packaging cited as the main contributory factors. 'Business' was frequently cited as the circumstance surrounding the error. Conclusion This study demonstrates that pharmacists do have an important part to play and the positive impact of community pharmacists in preventing, detecting and correcting errors and thus preventing harm to patients in the primary care setting. However, medication errors do occur, and therefore a multifactorial approach by manufacturers, marketing and packaging personnel, in addition to input from pharmacists, may be an effective permanent solution in reducing the errors made.Rigorous clinical trials prove medicines to be therapeutically effective treatments. However, with an increasing range of medicines available for each therapeutic area, complicated drug regimens and an ageing population becoming reliant on more than just one drug for a variety of conditions, the risk for interactions and scope for human error is increased. Many medication errors display strong similarities to incidents that have occurred on previous occasions, and in some cases replicate them.