Comparing safety, performance and user perceptions of a patient-specific indication-based prescribing tool with current practice: A mixed-methods randomised user testing study

Author:

Feather CalandraORCID,Appelbaum Nicholas,Clarke JonathanORCID,Darzi Ara,Franklin Bryony

Abstract

AbstractBackgroundMedication errors are the leading cause of preventable harm in healthcare. Despite proliferation of medication-related clinical decision support systems (CDSS), current systems have limitations. We therefore developed an indication-based prescribing tool. This performs dose calculations using an underlying formulary and provides patient-specific dosing recommendations. Objectives were to compare the incidence and types of erroneous medication orders, time to prescribe (TTP), and perceived workload using the NASA task load index (TLX), in simulated prescribing tasks with and without this intervention. We also sought to identify workflow steps most vulnerable to error and gain participant feedback.MethodsA simulated, randomised, cross-over exploratory study was conducted at a London NHS Trust. Participants completed five simulated prescribing tasks with, and five without, the intervention. Data collection methods comprised direct observation of prescribing tasks, self-reported task load and semi-structured interviews. A concurrent triangulation design combined quantitative and qualitative data.Results24 participants completed a total of 240 medication orders. The intervention was associated with fewer prescribing errors (6.6% of 120 medications) compared to standard practice (28.3%; relative risk reduction 76.5% p < 0.01), a shorter TTP and lower overall NASA TLX scores (p < 0.01). Control arm workflow vulnerabilities included failures in identifying correct doses, applying maximum dose limits, and calculating patient-specific dosages. Intervention arm errors primarily stemmed from misidentifying patient-specific information from the medication scenario. Thematic analysis of participant interviews identified six themes: Navigating trust and familiarity, addressing challenges and suggestions for improvement, integration of local guidelines and existing CDSS, intervention endorsement, ‘search by indication’ and targeting specific patient and staff groups.ConclusionThe intervention represents a promising advancement in medication safety, with implications for enhancing patient safety and efficiency. Further real-world evaluation and development of the system to meet the needs of more diverse patient groups, users and healthcare settings is now required.What is already known on this topic?Indication-based prescribing has the potential to improve prescribing efficiency and patient safety.What this study addsAn indication-based, patient-specific prescribing tool used in a simulation setting reduced the incidence of prescribing errors and the time to prescribe compared with standard practice.This study provides cumulative validity to the potential benefits of indication-based prescribing tools.How this study might affect research, practice or policyFuture evaluation of such tools in the real-world clinical setting is now required to identify the impact of such tools on clinical outcomes and prescribing workflow.

Publisher

Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory

Reference30 articles.

1. Medication Without Harm - Global Patient Safety Challenge on Medication Safety. 2017.

2. Economic analysis of the prevalence and clinical and economic burden of medication error in England

3. Improving medication-related clinical decision support

4. MHRA. Guidance on applying human factors and usability engineering of medical devices including drug-device combination products in Great Britain. 2021;(January): 35.

5. MHRA. Guidance on applying human factors and usability engineering of medical devices including drug-device combination products in Great Britain. 2021;(January): 35. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/970563/Human-Factors_Medical-Devices_v2.0.pdf

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