No abstract

Prescribing errors affect patient safety throughout hospital practice. Previous reviews of studies have often targeted specific populations or settings, or did not adopt a systematic approach to reviewing the literature. Therefore, we set out to systematically review the prevalence, incidence and nature of prescribing errors in hospital inpatients. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (all from 1985 to October 2007) were searched for studies of prescriptions for adult or child hospital inpatients giving enough data to calculate an error rate. Electronic prescriptions and errors for single diseases, routes of administration or types of prescribing error were excluded, as were non-English language publications. Median error rate (interquartile range [IQR]) was 7% (2-14%) of medication orders, 52 (8-227) errors per 100 admissions and 24 (6-212) errors per 1000 patient days. Most studies (84%) were conducted in single hospitals and originated from the US or UK (72%). Most errors were intercepted and reported before they caused harm, although two studies reported adverse drug events. Errors were most common with antimicrobials and more common in adults (median 18% of orders [ten studies, IQR 7-25%]) than children (median 4% [six studies, IQR 2-17%]). Incorrect dosage was the most common error. Overall, it is clear that prescribing errors are a common occurrence, affecting 7% of medication orders, 2% of patient days and 50% of hospital admissions. However, the reported rates of prescribing errors varied greatly and this could be partly explained by variations in the definition of a prescribing error, the methods used to collect error data and the setting of the study. Furthermore, a lack of standardization between severity scales prevented any comparison of error severity across studies. Future research should address the wide disparity of data-collection methods and definitions that bedevils comparison of error rates or meta-analysis of different studies.

Over the past twenty-five years, professionalism has emerged as a substantive and sustained theme, the operationalization and measurement of which, has become a major concern for those involved in medical education. However, how to go about establishing the elements that constitute appropriate professionalism in order to assess them is difficult. Using a discourse analysis approach, the International Ottawa Conference Working Group on Professionalism (IOCPWG) studied some of the dominant notions of professionalism, and in particular the implications for its assessment. The results presented here reveal different ways of thinking about professionalism that can lead toward a multi-dimensional, multi-paradigmatic approach to assessing professionalism at different levels: individual, inter-personal, societal-institutional. Recommendations for research about professionalism assessment are also presented.

For portfolios to be effective in supporting and assessing competence development, robust integration into the curriculum and tutor support are essential. Further studies should focus on the effectiveness and user-friendliness of portfolios, the merits of holistic assessment procedures, and the competences of an effective portfolio mentor.

Prescribing errors are common, they result in adverse events and harm to patients and it is unclear how best to prevent them because recommendations are more often based on surmized rather than empirically collected data. The aim of this systematic review was to identify all informative published evidence concerning the causes of and factors associated with prescribing errors in specialist and non-specialist hospitals, collate it, analyse it qualitatively and synthesize conclusions from it. Seven electronic databases were searched for articles published between 1985-July 2008. The reference lists of all informative studies were searched for additional citations. To be included, a study had to be of handwritten prescriptions for adult or child inpatients that reported empirically collected data on the causes of or factors associated with errors. Publications in languages other than English and studies that evaluated errors for only one disease, one route of administration or one type of prescribing error were excluded. Seventeen papers reporting 16 studies, selected from 1268 papers identified by the search, were included in the review. Studies from the US and the UK in university-affiliated hospitals predominated (10/16 [62%]). The definition of a prescribing error varied widely and the included studies were highly heterogeneous. Causes were grouped according to Reason's model of accident causation into active failures, error-provoking conditions and latent conditions. The active failure most frequently cited was a mistake due to inadequate knowledge of the drug or the patient. Skills-based slips and memory lapses were also common. Where error-provoking conditions were reported, there was at least one per error. These included lack of training or experience, fatigue, stress, high workload for the prescriber and inadequate communication between healthcare professionals. Latent conditions included reluctance to question senior colleagues and inadequate provision of training. Prescribing errors are often multifactorial, with several active failures and error-provoking conditions often acting together to cause them. In the face of such complexity, solutions addressing a single cause, such as lack of knowledge, are likely to have only limited benefit. Further rigorous study, seeking potential ways of reducing error, needs to be conducted. Multifactorial interventions across many parts of the system are likely to be required.

Professional values and behaviours are intrinsic to all medical practice, yet remain one of the most difficult subjects to integrate explicitly into a curriculum. Professionalism for the twenty-first century raises challenges not only to adapting the course to changing societal values but also for instilling skills of ongoing self-directed continuous development in trainees for future revalidation. This Guide is based on the contemporary available literature and focuses on instilling Professionalism positively into both undergraduate and postgraduate training deliberately avoiding the more negative aspects of Fitness to Practise. The literature on Professionalism is extensive. An evidence-based approach has been taken throughout. We have selected only some of the available publications to offer practical advice. Comprehensive reviews are available elsewhere (van Mook et al. 2009a-g). This Guide takes a structured stepwise approach and sequentially addresses: (i) agreeing an institutional definition, (ii) structuring the curriculum to integrate learning across all years, (iii) suggesting learning models, (iv) harnessing the impact of the formal, informal and hidden curricula and (v) assessing the learning. Finally, a few well-evaluated case studies for both teaching and assessment have been selected to illustrate our recommendations.

IntroductionIt has been suggested that doctors in their first year of post-graduate training make a disproportionate number of prescribing errors.ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the prevalence of prescribing errors made by first-year post-graduate doctors with that of errors by senior doctors and non-medical prescribers and to investigate the predictors of potentially serious prescribing errors.MethodsPharmacists in 20 hospitals over 7 prospectively selected days collected data on the number of medication orders checked, the grade of prescriber and details of any prescribing errors. Logistic regression models (adjusted for clustering by hospital) identified factors predicting the likelihood of prescribing erroneously and the severity of prescribing errors.ResultsPharmacists reviewed 26,019 patients and 124,260 medication orders; 11,235 prescribing errors were detected in 10,986 orders. The mean error rate was 8.8 % (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.6–9.1) errors per 100 medication orders. Rates of errors for all doctors in training were significantly higher than rates for medical consultants. Doctors who were 1 year (odds ratio [OR] 2.13; 95 % CI 1.80–2.52) or 2 years in training (OR 2.23; 95 % CI 1.89–2.65) were more than twice as likely to prescribe erroneously. Prescribing errors were 70 % (OR 1.70; 95 % CI 1.61–1.80) more likely to occur at the time of hospital admission than when medication orders were issued during the hospital stay. No significant differences in severity of error were observed between grades of prescriber. Potentially serious errors were more likely to be associated with prescriptions for parenteral administration, especially for cardiovascular or endocrine disorders.ConclusionThe problem of prescribing errors in hospitals is substantial and not solely a problem of the most junior medical prescribers, particularly for those errors most likely to cause significant patient harm. Interventions are needed to target these high-risk errors by all grades of staff and hence improve patient safety.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s40264-015-0320-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

ObjectivesWithin medical education, patterns of achievement indicate that white students outperform their ethnic minority peers. The processes behind these patterns have not been adequately investigated or explained. This study utilises social network analysis to investigate the impact of relationships on medical student achievement by ethnicity, specifically by examining homophily (the tendency to interact with others in the same group) by ethnicity, age and role. MethodsData are presented from a cross-sectional social network study in one UK medical school, analysed alongside examination records obtained from the medical school. Participants were sampled across the four hospital placement sites at this university, a total of 159 medical students in their clinical phase (year 3) completed the survey. The research was designed and analysed using social capital theory. ResultsAlthough significant patterns of ethnic and religious homophily existed, no link was found between these factors and achievement. Interacting with PBL group peers in study-related activities, and having seniors in a wider academic support network were directly linked to better achievement.Students in higher academic quartiles were more likely to name at least one tutor or clinician in their network. Different patterns of relationship formation and social network features were observed by ethnicity. Students from non-white, Muslim and lower achieving groups are least likely to have indicate the social capital enabling and resulting from interaction with members from more expert social groups. 3 ConclusionsLower levels of the social capital that mediates interaction with peers, tutors and clinicians may be the cause of underperformance by ethnic minority students. Due to gaps in their social network, minority students may be cut off from potential and actual resources that facilitate learning and achievement.4