ArticleGlobal journal on quality and safety in healthcare2024
Prescribing Errors in an Ambulatory Care Setting: Mitigating Risks in Outpatient Medication Orders, Cross-Sectional Review.
Article in Global journal on quality and safety in healthcare, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Prescribing errors (PEs) are the most common type of medication error, which may occur by prescribing the wrong medication, improper dose, dosage, and/or even prescribing a drug to the wrong patient. The present study aims to compile PEs that were generated in an ambulatory care setting at a tertiary-care hospital in Saudi Arabia. Methods: A retrospective cross-sectional review was conducted for all reported PEs in ambulatory care clinics for 3 years. The potential hazardous outcomes of these PEs were classified according to the medication error index. Results: A total of 897 records containing 1199 PEs were retrieved. More than a third of prescribers had frequently committed PEs-ranging from 2 to 39 times. The most encountered errors were prescribing incorrect doses, medication duplication, incorrect dosing frequency, and inappropriate duration (34.5%, 14.1%, 11.6%, and 9.8%, respectively). The most frequent mistakes were when prescribing antibiotics (22.9%) and drugs for cardiovascular conditions (18.5%). Most errors were of mild to moderate severity, mostly type-B near-miss errors and did not reach patients. Only two prescription events (0.17%) had severe consequences that required intervention to avoid any subsequent harm or damage. Conclusion: The current investigation has revealed a substantial percentage of PEs, mostly in internal medicine and cardiology departments. Although PEs are undoubtedly not easy to avoid, monitoring and recognizing these inaccuracies is pivotal to preventing potential harm and promoting patient safety.
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.