Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34426478›Full record

ReviewEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021

Magnitude of error: a review of wrong dose medication incidents reported to a UK hospital voluntary incident reporting system.

Gillian F Cavell, Deepal Mandaliya

Open access · bronzeAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
3.0field-weighted citation impact, top 9% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 35 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Proactive risk assessment and nursing risk management in chemotherapy drugs: FMECA methodology results.Journal of healthcare risk management : the journal of the American Society for Healthcare Risk Management · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Prescription of off-label and unlicensed medication for newborns hospitalized in the Intensive Care Unit.Revista paulista de pediatria : orgao oficial da Sociedade de Pediatria de Sao Paulo · 2023
    Observational
  9. Review
  10. Position paper on patient safety.European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice · 2020
    Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Gillian F CavellPharmacy Department, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK gillian.cavell@nhs.net.ORCID 0000-0002-7627-6893
Deepal MandaliyaPharmacy Department, King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK.
King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesOur aim was to review medication-related incidents reported to a hospital voluntary incident reporting system to identify and quantify the magnitude of wrong dose errors.

methodsThe study was a retrospective review of medication-related incidents reported over a 7-year period at a large acute teaching hospital in the UK, providing secondary and tertiary care for a range of clinical specialties. Medication-related incident reports submitted from all clinical settings were reviewed. Incidents submitted under the categories 'wrong dose', 'wrong dose preparation', 'wrong rate' or 'wrong quantity' and describing situations where incorrect doses were prescribed, dispensed or administered were analysed. Magnitudes of medication overdoses and underdoses reported from adult and paediatric settings were calculated. Stage of the medicines process and drug classes most commonly involved in wrong dose errors were described.

resultsOf 12 006 reported medication incidents, 1568 described 'wrong-dose' errors: 702 (44.8%) were prescribing errors, 223 (14.2%) were dispensing errors and 643 (41%) were administration errors. Overdoses were reported more frequently than underdoses. 926 (59%) of reported wrong dose errors were overdoses, 464 (29.6%) were underdoses; the magnitude could not be determined in 178 (11.4%) of reports. Twofold and 10-fold overdoses and underdoses were the most commonly reported error magnitude, although dosing errors across a wide range of magnitudes were reported. Incidents were reported from paediatric wards (491, 31.3%), non-paediatric wards and clinical settings (880, 56.1%) and pharmacy (197, 12.6%). Prescribing errors (702, 45.9%) were reported more commonly than administration (643, 41%) and dispensing errors (223, 14.2%). Drugs acting on the central nervous system, cardiovascular drugs and anti-infectives were the drug classes most commonly involved.

conclusionsWrong dose errors occur across all inpatient settings. Wrong dose errors of all magnitudes are possible, but twofold and 10-fold errors occur most frequently. Drug classes involved in wrong dose incidents reported to a voluntary reporting system in a large acute hospital are similar to those identified using other methodologies. Harms and potential harms associated with specific drugs and error magnitudes need to be identified to inform quality improvement work to reduce the risk of patient harm.

Indexed as

Medication ErrorsRisk ManagementChildHospitals, TeachingHumansRetrospective StudiesUnited Kingdomclinical governancedrug overdoseinpatientsmedication errorpatient safetyrisk management

Identifiers

PMID34426478
PMCPMC8403774
OpenAlexW2969328437

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.