Literature DB >> 23184352

Clinical pharmacy interventions in paediatric electronic prescriptions.

Barbara Maat1, Yuen San Au, Casper W Bollen, Adrianus J van Vught, Toine C G Egberts, Carin M A Rademaker.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the frequency, nature and determinants of clinical pharmacy interventions in paediatric electronic prescriptions.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort with nested case-control study.
SETTING: Tertiary children's hospital, The Netherlands. PATIENTS: Patients 0-18 years with at least one drug prescription admitted to hospital between 1 March 2004 and 1 January 2008, excluding patients receiving intensive care.
INTERVENTIONS: Electronic medication prescriptions for paediatric inpatients were verified and if necessary interventions were made by the paediatric clinical pharmacy. Prescriptions requiring intervention (cases) were compared with prescriptions not requiring interventions (controls). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Frequency of clinical pharmacy interventions, per 10 000 paediatric electronic prescriptions, and the determinants thereof.
RESULTS: Interventions were made for 1577 (1.1%) of 138 449 prescriptions. 81% of the interventions concerned correction of a prescription that might have had adverse clinical consequences. Interventions in prescriptions for antibacterial agents for systemic use were made most often. Most corrections concerned wrong doses (45%). 1577 cases were compared with 1983 controls. The risk of interventions was higher for children aged 1 month to 2 years than for 12-18-year-olds (OR=1.97 (95% CI 1.63 to 2.38)). The risk for 'free-text' prescriptions was five times higher than for 'standardised structured template' prescriptions. No differences were found between day, evening and night shift prescriptions. Significantly more interventions were made in the oral dosage form (OR=1.63 (95% CI 1.41 to 1.88)) and administration route (OR=1.80 (95% CI 1.55 to 2.09)) than for other reasons.
CONCLUSIONS: Paediatric prescribing errors occur frequently and are not completely prevented by electronic prescribing systems. This study provides information for improvements in electronic prescribing for paediatric patients. Incorporating tailored solutions, such as minimised free-text entry, certain obligatory fields and integrated dose checking and indications, can improve the quality and efficiency of electronic prescribing in paediatrics.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23184352     DOI: 10.1136/archdischild-2012-302817

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Dis Child        ISSN: 0003-9888            Impact factor:   3.791


  11 in total

Review 1.  New technologies as a strategy to decrease medication errors: how do they affect adults and children differently?

Authors:  Margarita Ruano; Elena Villamañán; Ester Pérez; Alicia Herrero; Rodolfo Álvarez-Sala
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2015-12-18       Impact factor: 2.764

2.  A systematic review of clinical pharmacist interventions in paediatric hospital patients.

Authors:  Aaron Drovandi; Kelvin Robertson; Matthew Tucker; Niechole Robinson; Stephen Perks; Therése Kairuz
Journal:  Eur J Pediatr       Date:  2018-06-19       Impact factor: 3.183

3.  Analysis of electronic medication orders with large overdoses: opportunities for mitigating dosing errors.

Authors:  E S Kirkendall; M Kouril; T Minich; S A Spooner
Journal:  Appl Clin Inform       Date:  2014-01-08       Impact factor: 2.342

4.  The effect of a decision support system on the incidence of prescription errors in a PICU.

Authors:  Fatema Hashemi; Thomas G van Gelder; Casper W Bollen; Yves T B Liem; Toine C G Egberts
Journal:  J Clin Pharm Ther       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 2.145

5.  The difference in pharmacists' interventions across the diverse settings in a children's hospital.

Authors:  Hesty Utami Ramadaniati; Ya Ping Lee; Jeffery David Hughes
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-10-08       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Medication audit and feedback by a clinical pharmacist decrease medication errors at the PICU: An interrupted time series analysis.

Authors:  Jolanda M Maaskant; Marieke A Tio; Reinier M van Hest; Hester Vermeulen; Vincent G M Geukers
Journal:  Health Sci Rep       Date:  2018-01-19

Review 7.  Including the Reason for Use on Prescriptions Sent to Pharmacists: Scoping Review.

Authors:  Kathryn Mercer; Caitlin Carter; Catherine Burns; Ryan Tennant; Lisa Guirguis; Kelly Grindrod
Journal:  JMIR Hum Factors       Date:  2021-11-25

8.  Qualitative exploration of practices to prevent medication errors in neonatal intensive care units: a focus group study.

Authors:  Rikke Mie Rishoej; Henriette Lai Nielsen; Stina Maria Strzelec; Jane Fritsdal Refer; Sanne Allermann Beck; Hanne Marie Gramstrup; Henrik Thybo Christesen; Lene Juel Kjeldsen; Jesper Hallas; Anna Birna Almarsdóttir
Journal:  Ther Adv Drug Saf       Date:  2018-04-23

9.  Meaningful Use of Electronic Health Records: Experiences From the Field and Future Opportunities.

Authors:  Sarah Patricia Slight; Eta S Berner; William Galanter; Stanley Huff; Bruce L Lambert; Carole Lannon; Christoph U Lehmann; Brian J McCourt; Michael McNamara; Nir Menachemi; Thomas H Payne; S Andrew Spooner; Gordon D Schiff; Tracy Y Wang; Ayse Akincigil; Stephen Crystal; Stephen P Fortmann; David W Bates
Journal:  JMIR Med Inform       Date:  2015-09-18

Review 10.  The use of narrative electronic prescribing instructions in pharmacoepidemiology: A scoping review for the International Society for Pharmacoepidemiology.

Authors:  Robert J Romanelli; Naomi R M Schwartz; William G Dixon; Carla Rodriguez-Watson; Brian C Sauer; Dawn Albright; Zachary A Marcum
Journal:  Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf       Date:  2021-07-28       Impact factor: 2.732

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.