Prescription Errors and Pharmacists Intervention in a Belizean Hospital: a preliminary study.

Abstract

Presently, there is no reported data on prescription errors in Belize, even though the potential for such errors exists and is discussed among pharmacists. Frequent review of prescriptions by a pharmacist is a part of routine prescription monitoring duties; however, it is not routine for pharmacists to prospectively record details of identified prescribing errors. This study examined the potential prescription errors and interventions by the pharmacist during ward rounds in Belize. The study's outcome might lead to establishing a protocol for reporting potential prescription errors in a blame-free and non-punitive environment. Furthermore, the study's results will help improve the quality of care needed when prescribing while creating a culture where prescription writing is seen as an essential and formally reviewed intervention by pharmacists. This research utilized a quantitative assessment to examine prescription errors in a selected hospital. All handwritten inpatient prescription orders and drug charts from admission and discharge at the accident and emergency ward, general medical, surgical, pediatrics and medical wards, and intensive care unit were reviewed for prescription errors. The identified errors on prescriptions were coded and documented using a checklist; this data was then coded and analyzed using SPSS version 20.  Six thousand nine hundred eighty-eight prescriptions were reviewed for prescription errors over four months from June to September. Overall, an average of 0.03 errors per prescription was documented in the study out of a total of 189 prescription errors documented, with the majority of these errors identified from the general medical ward. The most common prescription errors identified in this study were inappropriate (wrong) frequency 88 (46.3%). Among the frequent prescription errors in medicines, the highest were antibiotics errors, 44 (23.2%). Ninety-eight percent (98%) of the pharmacist interventions were accepted by the prescribers. Although the prescription error rates found in this study are minimal compared to the number of prescriptions reviewed, the results showed that prescription errors exist, at least in the hospital where the study was conducted. The potential for this error is an avoidable risk, and improvement is still needed. The pharmacists' interventions were accepted. These findings could be incorporated into a regular monitoring and feedback system to emphasize the importance of communication and collaboration between pharmacists and prescribers to prevent patient harm.