RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, the aim was to investigate if an electronic prescribing system designed specifically to reduce errors would lead to fewer errors in prescribing medicines in a secondary care setting. METHOD: The electronic system was compared with paper prescription charts on 16 intensive care patients to assess any change in the number of prescribing errors. RESULTS: The overall level of compliance with nationally accepted standards was significantly higher with the electronic system (91.67%) compared with the paper system (46.73%). Electronically generated prescriptions were found to contain significantly fewer deviations (28 in 329 prescriptions, 8.5%) than the written prescriptions (208 in 408 prescriptions, 51%). CONCLUSION: Taking an interdisciplinary approach to work on the creation of a system designed to minimize the risk of error has resulted in a favoured system that significantly reduces the number of errors made.
RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: In this study, the aim was to investigate if an electronic prescribing system designed specifically to reduce errors would lead to fewer errors in prescribing medicines in a secondary care setting. METHOD: The electronic system was compared with paper prescription charts on 16 intensive care patients to assess any change in the number of prescribing errors. RESULTS: The overall level of compliance with nationally accepted standards was significantly higher with the electronic system (91.67%) compared with the paper system (46.73%). Electronically generated prescriptions were found to contain significantly fewer deviations (28 in 329 prescriptions, 8.5%) than the written prescriptions (208 in 408 prescriptions, 51%). CONCLUSION: Taking an interdisciplinary approach to work on the creation of a system designed to minimize the risk of error has resulted in a favoured system that significantly reduces the number of errors made.
Authors: Markus G Pruszydlo; Stefanie U Walk-Fritz; Torsten Hoppe-Tichy; Jens Kaltschmidt; Walter E Haefeli Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2012-11-27 Impact factor: 2.796