ArticleSaudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society2013
Methods to reduce prescription errors in ophthalmic medication.
Article in Saudi journal of ophthalmology : official journal of the Saudi Ophthalmological Society, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Minimising prescription errors-a quality improvement project in the ophthalmology department in a tertiary referral hospital.International ophthalmology · 2021Article
- Safety around medicines for eye care.Community eye health · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this audit was to determine the most common medication related prescription errors in ophthalmic practice, to determine avoidable prescription errors and evaluate the effect of preventative methods against these errors.
methodsThe first audit was conducted prospectively over a four week period in Oct 2009 and a re-audit after 6 months on May 2010, to determine the effects of preventative measures suggested in the first audit.
resultsThere were 4.7% (29/623) prescription errors during the initial four week audit period. A method of check and counter check of prescriptions was implemented and re-audit showed a reduction in incidence of errors to 0.77% (5/651) errors.
conclusionsThe majority of prescribing errors occurred at the stage of writing the prescription and our findings suggest that the intervention of check and counter check can reduce the rate of error significantly.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.