Lindsay D Meyer1, Colette B Raymond, Christine M J Rodrigue. 1. , BSc, BSP, ACPR, was, at the time this study was completed, a Pharmacy Resident with the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, Winnipeg, Manitoba. She is now a Clinical Pharmacist with Alberta Health Services, Edmonton, Alberta.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: To create a checklist of the tasks that a pharmacist must perform during medication order review in the hospital setting and to evaluate the utility of and pharmacists' satisfaction with the checklist. METHODS: An evidence-based checklist for medication order review was developed, with items related to order urgency, verification of patients' identity, therapeutic review, and actionable items. Pharmacists were educated about the checklist, and it was made available at 2 community hospitals in an urban setting. Pharmacists completed a nonvalidated satisfaction survey and participated in focus groups or interviews within 3 months after implementation of the checklist. Qualitative descriptive theory was used to identify themes within the data. Near-miss occurrence reports for the 3 months before and after implementation of the checklist were quantified. RESULTS: Of 16 pharmacists who were involved in the implementation phase, 14 participated in focus groups or an interview, and 11 responded to the survey. All respondents felt that the primary role of the checklist was for training. They felt that the checklist could be useful when reviewing high-alert or unfamiliar medications or therapy for patients with complex medications. The checklist was most helpful when it was used as a reminder, on an as-needed basis. Nine (82%) of the 11 survey respondents indicated that the checklist standardized the process of medication order review, the same number felt that it prevented accidental omission of critical checks, and 8 (73%) felt that it improved patient safety. Education was necessary to reinforce the purpose of the checklist and its self-check nature. There was no difference in the number of near misses in the pharmacy between the 3-month periods before and after implementation of the checklist. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists participating in the study felt that a checklist for medication order review had a role in training new pharmacists and standardizing processes.
BACKGROUND: To create a checklist of the tasks that a pharmacist must perform during medication order review in the hospital setting and to evaluate the utility of and pharmacists' satisfaction with the checklist. METHODS: An evidence-based checklist for medication order review was developed, with items related to order urgency, verification of patients' identity, therapeutic review, and actionable items. Pharmacists were educated about the checklist, and it was made available at 2 community hospitals in an urban setting. Pharmacists completed a nonvalidated satisfaction survey and participated in focus groups or interviews within 3 months after implementation of the checklist. Qualitative descriptive theory was used to identify themes within the data. Near-miss occurrence reports for the 3 months before and after implementation of the checklist were quantified. RESULTS: Of 16 pharmacists who were involved in the implementation phase, 14 participated in focus groups or an interview, and 11 responded to the survey. All respondents felt that the primary role of the checklist was for training. They felt that the checklist could be useful when reviewing high-alert or unfamiliar medications or therapy for patients with complex medications. The checklist was most helpful when it was used as a reminder, on an as-needed basis. Nine (82%) of the 11 survey respondents indicated that the checklist standardized the process of medication order review, the same number felt that it prevented accidental omission of critical checks, and 8 (73%) felt that it improved patient safety. Education was necessary to reinforce the purpose of the checklist and its self-check nature. There was no difference in the number of near misses in the pharmacy between the 3-month periods before and after implementation of the checklist. CONCLUSION: Pharmacists participating in the study felt that a checklist for medication order review had a role in training new pharmacists and standardizing processes.
Authors: Harry C Sax; Patrick Browne; Raymond J Mayewski; Robert J Panzer; Kathleen C Hittner; Rebecca L Burke; Sandra Coletta Journal: Arch Surg Date: 2009-12
Authors: L Lingard; S Espin; B Rubin; S Whyte; M Colmenares; G R Baker; D Doran; E Grober; B Orser; J Bohnen; R Reznick Journal: Qual Saf Health Care Date: 2005-10