Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39534239›Full record

ArticleGlobal journal on quality and safety in healthcare2024

Prescribing Errors in an Ambulatory Care Setting: Mitigating Risks in Outpatient Medication Orders, Cross-Sectional Review.

Wesam S Abdel-Razaq, Ghada Mardawi, Aiman A Obaidat, Lama Aljahani, Maram Almutairi, Reham Almotiri, Nataleen A Albekairy, Tariq Aldebasi, Abdulkareem M Albekairy, Mohammad S Shawaqfeh

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

10 authors.

Wesam S Abdel-RazaqCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Ghada MardawiKing Abdulaziz Medical City, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Aiman A ObaidatCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Lama AljahaniCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Maram AlmutairiCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Reham AlmotiriCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Nataleen A AlbekairyCollege of Medicine, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Tariq AldebasiKing Abdullah International Medical Research Centre, Ministry of National Guard-Health Affairs, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Abdulkareem M AlbekairyCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Mohammad S ShawaqfehCollege of Pharmacy, King Saud bin Abdulaziz University for Health Sciences, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0469-2764

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

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

adverse drug events (ADEs)ambulatory caremedication reconciliationoutpatientpatient safetyprescribing errors

Identifiers

PMID39534239
PMCPMC11554399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.