ArticleInternational ophthalmology2021
Minimising prescription errors-a quality improvement project in the ophthalmology department in a tertiary referral hospital.
Article in International ophthalmology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Assessment of drug utilization evaluation and post-dispensing knowledge of ophthalmic medications: an explanatory sequential mixed-methods study at the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital, Northwest Ethiopia.BMC health services research · 2025Article
- Development and Implementation of a Clinical Decision Support System to Enhance Efficiency and Accuracy in Medication Prescription Review in a Tertiary Care Hospital: A Retrospective Hospital CDSS Register Study.Journal of multidisciplinary healthcare · 2025Article
- Current views of community and hospital pharmacists on pharmaceutical care services in the United Arab Emirates: A mixed methodological study.F1000Research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe aim of this quality improvement project was to look into the hospital prescriptions and to identify and record the type and number of errors, to implement measures to reduce the risk of these errors and then to reaudit to assess the impact of changes implemented.
methodsThe initial audit was conducted prospectively over a eleven-week period. Prescriptions written by doctors of all grades and members of the staff, such as optometrists and nurses, were analysed. A glaucoma prescription guide along with more training at prescribing for doctors was introduced with a view to reducing these errors. A reaudit later demonstrated a significant reduction in these errors.
resultsAfter the introduction of a glaucoma prescription guide and more training for all grades of staff members, prescription errors reduced to 73/2342 (3.1%). Reaudit showed a reduction in both prescription writing errors 50/73(68.4%) and drug-related errors 23/73(31.6%).
conclusionPrescription errors are avoidable. This audit demonstrated that providing an accessible, easy to read and understand glaucoma prescription guide in the outpatient department along with targeted training for medical staff in prescribing can help in minimising these errors and can lead to safer practice.
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.