Back to Journals » Integrated Pharmacy Research and Practice » Volume 2

Analysis of reported e-prescribing near misses in King Saud Medical City, Riyadh

Authors Al-Zaagi IA, Aldhwaihi KA, Al-Dossari DS, Salem SO, Qureshi NA

Received 26 July 2013

Accepted for publication 22 August 2013

Published 23 October 2013 Volume 2013:2 Pages 17—24

DOI https://doi.org/10.2147/IPRP.S52080

Checked for plagiarism Yes

Review by Single-blind

Peer reviewer comments 3


Ibrahim Abdulaziz Al-Zaagi,1 Khalid Abdulrahman Aldhwaihi,2 Dalal Salem Al-Dossari,1 Sara Osama Salem,3 Naseem Akhtar Qureshi4

1Pharmaceutical Care and Medication Safety, King Saud Medical City, 2General Administration of Pharmaceutical Care, Ministry of Health, 3Drug Poisoning Information Center, King Saud Medical City, 4General Administration of Research and Studies, Ministry of Health, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Background: In the health care context, a “near miss” is a drug presciption error that happened but did not affect the patient. These errors are captured and corrected before reaching the patient fortuitously or purposefully by designed system controls. This study analyzed the reported near misses in a tertiary care hospital in Riyadh city.
Methods: This cross-sectional study evaluated consecutively collected near miss report forms over a period of 6 months from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2012.
Results: The total number of near miss report forms was 1,025 and each form contained one or more near misses. Of these near miss report forms, 58.73% (n = 602) were related to male patients. Most frequently reported near misses were wrong frequency (n = 266, 25.95%), followed by improper doses (n = 250, 24.39%), wrong drug prescribed (n = 126, 12.29%), wrong duration (n = 97, 9.46%), wrong concentration (n = 92, 8.98%), and wrong dosage form (n = 57, 5.56%). Stages where most near misses were identified included transcription and entering (n = 676, 55.32%), physician ordering (n = 397, 32.49%), and dispensing and delivery (n = 115, 9.41%). Physicians and nurses made most of the near misses (n = 929, 89.1%), whereas pharmacists identified most of the near misses (n = 1,002, 97.3%). Most frequently reported reasons for near misses were lack of staff training (n = 419, 34.12%), communication problems related to drug order (n = 387, 31.5%), staff, workflow and milieu problems (n = 199, 16.2%), and missing drug information (n = 121, 9.85%). Sites related to most near misses were the general hospital outpatient department (n = 453, 44.67%), the general hospital emergency room (n = 237, 23.37%), and the maternity hospital outpatient department (n = 203, 20.02%). Pharmacists intervened by correcting drug-related items in most near misses (n = 702, 34.58%), waited for a response from source of errors (n = 358, 17.64%), called reporter for clarifications (n = 471, 23.20%), or did not dispense the drug (n = 331, 16.3%). Drugs most frequently involved in near misses were anti-infective (n = 239, 22.61%), cardiovascular (n = 207, 19.58%), and central nervous system (n = 154, 14.57%) agents.
Conclusion: This prospective study provides some important tentative pharmacovigilance insights into near misses, which are comparable with current international trends in near misses. Further studies on near misses are warranted in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

Keywords: near miss, medication errors, e-prescribing, electronic prescribing system, Saudi Arabia

Creative Commons License This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution - Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License. By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms.

Download Article [PDF]