Effect of a computerized prescriber-order-entry system on reported medication errors

Spencer, Domina Eberle; Leininger, Aaron; Daniels, Rowell; Granko, Robert P.; Coeytaux, Remy R

doi:10.1093/ajhp/62.4.0416

Cited by 18 publications

(31 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Three systematic reviews, 6,8–10 one review 4 and 20 studies 11–30 were identified that attempted to answer this question. One systematic review provided very general information on the results of trials and therefore any studies not identified in the other reviews that addressed interventions to reduce medication errors were individually identified and assessed 10 and are included in the count of the number of studies in the beginning of the paragraph.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Strategies to reduce medication errors with reference to older adults

Hodgkinson

Koch

Nay

et al. 2006

Int J EB Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In a recent controlled trial, the effect of CPOE on medication errors was evaluated in a university hospital setting 30 . After 8‐ and 11‐month pre‐intervention periods, two general medicine units were provided with a CPOE system for a further 7 and 4 months, respectively.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Strategies to reduce medication errors with reference to older adults

Hodgkinson

Koch

Nay

et al. 2006

Int J EB Healthcare

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is commonplace to use the methods described above, i.e. pharmacist prescription review [14, 16, 18, 27, 37] or medical record review [31, 36, 38–40], for both the ‘before’ and ‘after’ phases.…”

Section: Prevalence and Incidencementioning

confidence: 99%

Prescribing errors in hospital practice

Tully

2012

Brit J Clinical Pharma

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prescribing errors that occur in hospitals have been a source of concern for decades. This narrative review describes some of the recent work in this field. There is considerable heterogeneity in definitions and methods used in research on prescribing errors. There are three definitions that are used most frequently (one for prescribing errors specifically and two for the broader arena of medication errors), although many others have also been used. Research methods used focus primarily on investigating either the prescribing process (such as errors in the dose prescribed) or the outcomes for the patient (such as preventable adverse drug events). This complicates attempts to calculate the overall prevalence or incidence of errors. Errors have been reported in handwritten descriptions of almost 15% and with electronic prescribing of up to 8% of orders. Errors are more likely to be identified on admission to hospital than at any other time (usually failure to continue ongoing medication) and errors of dose occur most commonly throughout the patients' stay. Although there is evidence that electronic prescribing reduces the number of errors, new types of errors also occur. The literature on causes of error shows some commonality with both handwritten and electronic prescribing but there are also causes that are unique to each. A greater understanding of the prevalence of the complex causal pathways found and the differences between the pathways of minor and severe errors is necessary. Such an understanding would underpin theoretically-based interventions to reduce the occurrence of prescribing errors.

show abstract

“…Are interventions that are designed to reduce medication errors during the ordering, transcribing, dispensing and administering of prescription drugs to patients 65 years and over effective? Three systematic reviews, 6,8-10 one review 4 and 20 studies [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30] were identified that attempted to answer this question. One systematic review provided very general information on the results of trials and therefore any studies not identified in the other reviews that addressed interventions to reduce medication errors were individually identified and assessed 10 and are included in the count of the number of studies in the beginning of the paragraph.…”

Section: Are Interventions Effective At Reducing Medication Errors Inmentioning

confidence: 99%