Use of a generic protocol in documentation of prescription errors in Estonia, Norway and Sweden

  • Daisy Volmer
  • Svein Haavik
  • Anders Ekedahl

Abstract

Pharmacists have an important role in detecting, preventing, and solving prescription problems, which if left unresolved, may pose a risk of harming the patient.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to evaluate the feasibility of a generic study instrument for documentation of prescription problems requiring contact with prescriber before dispensing. The study was organized: 1) by countries: Estonia, Norway and Sweden; 2) by type of prescriptions: handwritten prescriptions, printouts of prescriptions in the electronic medical record and electronically transmitted prescriptions to pharmacies; and 3) by recording method - self-completion by pharmacists and independent observers.

Methods: Observational study with independent observers at community pharmacies in Estonia (n=4) and Sweden (n=7) and self-completed protocols in Norway (n=9).

Results: Pharmacists’ in Estonia contacted the prescriber for 1.47% of the prescriptions, about 3 times as often as in Norway (0.45%) and Sweden (0.38%). Handwritten prescriptions dominated among the problem prescriptions in Estonia (73.2%), printouts of prescriptions in the electronic medical record (89.1%) in Norway and electronically transmitted prescriptions to pharmacies (55.9%) in Sweden.

More administrative errors were identified on handwritten prescriptions and printouts of prescriptions in the electronic medical record in Estonia and in Norway compared with electronically transmitted prescriptions to pharmacies in Sweden (p<0.05 for prescription types and p<0.01 for countries). However, clinically important errors and delivery problems appeared equally often on the different types of prescriptions. In all three countries, only few cases of drug interactions and adverse drug reactions were identified.

Conclusion: Despite the different patterns of prescription problems in three countries, the instrument was feasible and can be regarded appropriate to document and classify prescription problems necessitating contact with prescriber before dispensing, irrespective of the type of prescription or recording method.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Dean B, Barber N, Schachter M. What is a prescribing error? Qual Health Care. 2000;9(4):232–237.

2. Kuo GM, Phillips RL, Graham D, Hickner JM. Medication errors reported by US family physicians and their office staff. Qual Saf Health Care. 2008;17(4):286-290.

3. Council of Europe. Creation of a better medication safety culture in Europe: Building up safe medication practices. Expert Group on Safe Medication Practices (P-SP-PH-SAFE) (2006). Available from http://www.coe.int/t/e/social_cohesion/soc-sp/Medication%20safety%20culture%20report%20E.pdf (Accessed April 14, 2011).

4. Baciu A, Stratton K, Burke SP, eds. The Future of Drug Safety. Promoting and Protecting the Health of the Public. Washington: The National Academies Press; 2007.

5. Hawksworth GM, Corlett AJ, Wright DJ, Chrystyn H. Clinical pharmacy interventions by community pharmacists during the dispensing process. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 1999;47(6):695-700.

6. Buurma H, De Smet PA, Leufkens HG, Egberts AC. Evaluation of the clinical value of pharmacists’ modifications of prescription errors. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2004;58(5):503-511.

7. Claesson C, Burman K, Nilsson JLG, Vinge E. Prescription errors detected by Swedish pharmacists. Int J Pharm Pract. 1995;3,151-156.

8. Hulls V, Emmerton L. Prescription interventions in New Zealand community practice. J Soc Admin Pharm 1996;13:198-204.

9. Rupp MT, DeYoung M, Schondelmeyer SW. Prescribing problems and pharmacist interventions in community practice. Med Care. 1992;30(10):926-940.

10. Benrimoj SI, Langford JH, Berry G, Collins D, Lauchlan R, Stewart K, Aristides M, Dobson M. Economic impact of increased clinical intervention rates in community pharmacy. A randomised trial of the effect of education and a professional allowance. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;18(5):459-468.

11. Buurma H, de Smet PA, van den Hoff OP, Egberts AC. Nature, frequency and determinants of prescription modifications in Dutch community pharmacies. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2001;52(1):85-91.

12. Shah NH, Aslam M, Avery AJ. A survey of prescription errors in general practice. Pharm J 2001;(267):860-862.

13. Westein MP, Herings RM, Leufkens HG. Determinants of pharmacists’ interventions linked to prescription processing. Pharm World Sci. 2001;23(3):98-101.

14. Varkey P, Aponte P, Swanton C, Fischer D, Johnson SF, Brennan MD. The effect of computerized physician-order entry on outpatient prescription errors. Manag Care Interface. 2007;20(3):53-57.

15. Gil de San Vicente O, Erauncetamurgil O, de Escalza P, Odriozola I, Gastelurrutia MA. Assessment of poorly written prescriptions that reach a community pharmacy. Seguimiento Farmacoterapeutico 2005;3(3);125-129.

16. Astrand B, Montelius E, Petersson G, Ekedahl A. Assessment of ePrescription quality: an observational study at three mail-order pharmacies. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2009;9:8.

17. Ekedahl A. Problem prescriptions in Sweden necessitating contact with the prescriber before dispensing. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2010;6(3):174-184.

18. Westerlund LT, Björk HT. Pharmaceutical Care in Community Pharmacies: Practice and Research in Sweden. Ann Pharmacother. 2006;40(6):1162-1169.

19. Almarsdottir AB, Traulsen JM. Multimethod research into policy change in the pharmacy sector – The Nordic case. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2009;5(1):82-90.

20. Volmer D, Vendla K, Vetka A, Bell JS, Hamilton D. Pharmaceutical care in community pharmacies: practice and research in Estonia. Ann Pharmacother. 2008;42(7):1104-1111.

21. Haavik S, Horn AM, Mellbye KS, Kjønniksen I, Granås AG. Forskrivningsfeil - omfang og oppklaring. Tidsskr Nor Laegeforen. 2006 26;126(3):296-298.

22. Volmer D, Haavik S, Ekedahl A, Veski P. Probleemsed retseptid, mille alusel ravimi väljastamine apteegist nõuab konsultatsiooni ravimi ordineerijaga Eesti, Norra ja Rootsi võrdlusuuringu põhjal. Eesti Arst. 2010;89,5−12.

23. Kennedy AG, Littenberg B. A modified outpatient prescription form to reduce prescription errors. Jt Comm J Qual Saf. 2004;30(9):480-487.

24. Oliven A, Michalake I, Zalman D, Dorman E, Yeshurun D, Odeh M. Prevention of prescription errors by computerized, on-line surveillance of drug order entry. Int J Med Inform. 2005;74(5):377-386.

25. Koppel R, Metlay JP, Cohen A, Abaluck B, Localio AR, Kimmel SE, Strom BL. Role of computerized physician order entry systems in facilitating medication errors. JAMA. 2005;293(10):1197-1203.

26. Astrand B, Astrand E, Antonov K, Petersson G. Detection of potential drug interactions - a model for a national pharmacy register. Eur J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;62(9):749-756.

27. Johnell K, Klarin I. The relationship between number of drugs and potential drug-drug interactions in the elderly: a study of over 600,000 elderly patients from the Swedish Prescribed Drug Register. Drug Saf. 2007;30(10):911-918.

28. Leemans L, Veroeveren L, Bulens J, Hendrickx C, Keyenberg W, Niesten F, Vandeberg J, Van Hoof J, Laekeman G. Frequency and trends of interventions of prescriptions in Flemish community pharmacies. Pharm World Sci. 2003;25(2):65-69.

29. Lynskey D, Haigh SJ, Patel N, Macadam AB. Medication errors in community pharmacy: an investigation into the types and potential causes. Int J Pharm Pract 2007;15(2):105-112.

30. Bizovi KE, Beckley BE, McDade MC, Adams AL, Lowe RA, Zechnich AD, Hedges JR. The effect of computer-assisted prescription writing on emergency department prescription errors. Acad Emerg Med. 2002;9(11):1168-1175.

31. Mandt I, Horn AM, Ekedahl A, Granas AG. Community pharmacists' prescription intervention practices—Exploring variations in practice in Norwegian pharmacies. Res Social Adm Pharm. 2010;6(1):6-17.
Published
2012-06-15
Section
Original Research

Most read articles by the same author(s)