Investigating prescribing errors in the emergency department of a large governmental hospital in Jordan

Abstract

Background Although prescribing errors (PEs) are the most common type of medication errors and cause morbidity and mortality, they have been rarely studied. Objective The study aimed to investigate PEs incidence, types, severity, causes, predictors, pharmacists' interventions accepted by doctors and computer‐related errors. Setting This study was conducted in the emergency department of the largest governmental hospital in Jordan. Method This was a retrospective observational 4‐week study. A validated definition of PEs was adopted, and errors were identified by direct observation of all prescriptions. Structured interviews with doctors to assess the causes of errors were conducted within three days of the prescription date; the severity of PEs was rated by a committee. Main outcome measure Prescribing errors incidence, types, severity, causes, predictors, pharmacists' interventions accepted by doctors and computer‐related errors. Results For 1330 patients, 3470 medication orders were recorded. Almost one in five patients had PEs (n = 288, 21.65%), and the total number of medication orders for patients who had errors was 610. The PEs incidence was 12.5% (95% CI 11.4%–3.5% (n = 450/3597)). Analgesics were the most common medications associated with PEs (232/610, 38.03%). The top two types of PEs detected were wrong drug (165/450, 36.6%) and wrong dose (142/450, 31.5%) respectively. Most PEs were clinically significant errors (342/450, 76%). Doctors refused pharmacists' interventions on their orders in 132 (45.8%) prescriptions. The most common cause of errors was poor skills of doctors in electronic prescribing system (266/450, 59%). Predictors of PEs were the following: drug with multiple dosage forms (OR 2.998; 95% CI 1.41–6.34; P = 0.004) and a prescription with polypharmacy (OR 1.685; 95% CI 1.25%–2.26%; P = 0.001). Conclusion A national approach for observing, intervening on and correcting PEs is necessary to improve patient safety.

Evaluation of Telepharmacy Services in Light of COVID-19

“…These efforts might be the reason for the general controlled situation in the country. Medication safety-based research is rare in the Arabic region; most of the previous studies were conducted in hospital settings to document prescribing safety in the emergency departments 41 or the role of clinical pharmacists in reducing prescription-related errors. 42 This study had many limitations: (1) each community pharmacy operates nearly different system for medication dispensing, thus bias could be induced due to the variation, (2) due to lack of time and avoiding close personal contact with the staff and the patients, the main outcomes of this study may be underestimated, (3) the rate of acceptance for pharmacist interventions was beyond the scope of the study due to practical reasons, (4) we were unable to determine the impact of missing information on the accuracy of our findings, and (5) outcomes such as factors associated with error severity, causes, cost analysis, and channels of medicine delivery were unexamined in this study.…”

The Association Between Cognitive Medical Errors and Their Contributing Organizational and Individual Factors

“…In Jordan, no studies have investigated MEs in general, though some studies have investigated medication errors in particular. 8–12 In a study conducted in Jordan, the rate of medication errors using incident reports was 42%. 13 Another study reported a medication error rate of 35% (ie 36.4% in ICUs and 33.8% in wards).…”

Dispensing errors in community pharmacies in the United Arab Emirates: investigating incidence, types, severity, and causes

“…17 Among the developing countries, medication errors, particularly dispensing errors are common. 7,18,19 Dispensing of antibiotics without prescriptions and based on inappropriate reasons has been documented in Mozambique. 20 In Ghana, patients were satisfied with the dispensing process in community pharmacies.…”