Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

William Churchill

Publications and source records attributed to William Churchill.

6 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Medication dispensing errors and potential adverse drug events before and after implementing bar code technology in the pharmacy.

BACKGROUND: Many dispensing errors made in hospital pharmacies can harm patients. Some hospitals are investing in bar code technology to reduce these errors, but data about its efficacy are limited. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether implementation of bar code technology reduced dispensing errors and potential adverse drug events (ADEs). DESIGN: Before-and-after study using direct observations. SETTING: Hospital pharmacy at a 735-bed tertiary care academic medical center. INTERVENTION: A bar code-assisted dispensing system was implemented in 3 configurations. In 2 configurations, all doses were scanned once during the dispensing process. In the third configuration, only 1 dose was scanned if several doses of the same medication were being dispensed. MEASUREMENTS: Target dispensing errors, defined as dispensing errors that bar code technology was designed to address, and target potential ADEs, defined as target dispensing errors that can harm patients. RESULTS: In the pre- and post-bar code implementation periods, the authors observed 115,164 and 253,984 dispensed medication doses, respectively. Overall, the rates of target potential ADEs and all potential ADEs decreased by 74% and 63%, respectively. Of the 3 configurations of bar code technology studied, the 2 configurations that required staff to scan all doses had a 93% to 96% relative reduction in the incidence of target dispensing errors (P < 0.001) and 86% to 97% relative reduction in the incidence of potential ADEs (P < 0.001). However, the configuration that did not require scanning of every dose had only a 60% relative reduction in the incidence of target dispensing errors (P < 0.001) and an increased (by 2.4-fold) incidence of target potential ADEs (P = 0.014). There were several potentially life-threatening ADEs involving intravenous dopamine and intravenous heparin in that configuration. LIMITATIONS: The authors used surrogate outcomes; did not mask assessors to the purpose of study; and excluded the controlled substance fill process (a process with low error rates at baseline) from the study, which may bias the combined decrease in error rates toward a larger magnitude. CONCLUSIONS: The overall rates of dispensing errors and potential ADEs substantially decreased after implementing bar code technology. However, the technology should be configured to scan every dose during the dispensing process.

Drug Labeling↗
PubMed2006

How many hospital pharmacy medication dispensing errors go undetected?

BACKGROUND: Hospital pharmacies dispense large numbers of medication doses for hospitalized patients. A study was conducted at an academic tertiary care hospital to characterize the incidence and severity of medication dispensing errors in a hospital pharmacy. METHODS: Direct observation of dispensing processes was undertaken to determine presence of errors with review by a physician panel to determine severity. RESULTS: A total of 140,755 medication doses filled by pharmacy technicians were observed during a seven-month period, and 3.6% (5075) contalned errors. The hospital pharmacist detected only 79% of these errors during routine verification; thus, 0.75% of doses filled would have left the phannacy with undetected errors. Overall, 23.5% of undetected errors were potential adverse drug events (ADEs), of which 28% were serious and 0.8% were life threatening. The most common potential ADEs were incorrect medications (36%), incorrect strength (35%), and incorrect dosage form (21%). DISCUSSION: Given the volume of medications dispensed, even a low rate of drug distribution process translates into a large number of errors with potential to harm patients. Pharmacy distribution systems require further process redesign to achieve the highest possible level of safety and reliability.

Academic Medical Centers↗
PubMed2003

Creating an integrated patient safety team.

UNLABELLED: CREATING A PATIENT SAFETY TEAM: In May 2001 Brigham and Women's Hospital (Boston) created the Patient Safety Team, which was incorporated into the pre-existing safety and quality infrastructure. ESTABLISHING THE PATIENT SAFETY TEAM'S GOALS AND INITIATIVES: The goal was to create the safest possible environment for patients and staff by creating a culture of safety, increasing the capacity to measure and evaluate processes, committing to change unsafe processes, and adopting new technologies. To achieve this mission, the following initiatives were established: create a culture of safety, increase event identification, improve event analysis, close the feedback loop, assess risk proactively, improve medication safety, and involve the patient. DISCUSSION: Integrating the Patient Safety Team into pre-existing committees and departments facilitated its work while helping to reinforce the multidisciplinary nature of safety efforts. It is critical that pre-existing groups feel that patient safety represents value added and is not a threat to their current roles. SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS: If a patient safety strategy and team are to be effective, commitment from the organization's leaders is essential. This team should also work with individual departments and pre-existing quality structures to drive changes to the systems of care to enable health care to become as safe as possible.

Academic Medical Centers↗