Doctors attitudes towards medication errors at 2002 & 2015

Author:

Burns Naomi,Alkaisy Zina,Sharp Elaine

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the attitudes and beliefs of doctors towards medication error reporting following 15 years of a national patient safety agenda. Design/methodology/approach This is a qualitative descriptive study utilising semi-structured interviews. A group of ten doctors of different disciplines shared their attitudes and beliefs about medication error reporting. Using thematic content analysis, findings were reflected upon those collected by the same author of a similar study 13 years before (2002). Findings Five key themes were identified: lack of incident feedback, non-user-friendly incident reporting systems, supportive cultures, electronic prescribing and time pressures. Despite more positive responses to the benefits of medication error reporting in 2015 compared to 2002, doctors at both times expressed a reluctance to use the hospital’s incident reporting system, labelling it time consuming and non-user-friendly. A more supportive environment, however, where error had been made was thought to exist compared to 2002. The role of the pharmacist was highlighted as critical in reducing medication error with the introduction of electronic prescribing being pivotal in 2015. Originality/value To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to compare doctors’ attitudes on medication errors following a period of time of increased patient safety awareness. The results suggest that error reporting today is largely more positive and organisations are more supportive than in 2002. Despite a change from paper to electronic methods, there is a continuing need to improve the efficacy of incident reporting systems and ensure an open, supportive environment for clinicians.

Publisher

Emerald

Subject

Health Policy,General Business, Management and Accounting

Reference25 articles.

1. Can incident reporting improve safety? Healthcare practitioners’ views of the effectiveness of incident reporting;International Journal for Quality in Health Care,2013

2. Why error reporting systems should be voluntary;British Medical Journal,2000

3. A review of medication incidents reported to the national reporting and learning system in England and wales over 6 years;British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology,2012

4. European Medicines Agency (2015), “Pharmacovigilance—medication errors”, available at: www.ema.europa.eu/ema/index.jsp?curl=pages/special_topics/general/general_content_000570.jsp (accessed 1 November 2015).

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3