Elsevier

The Lancet

Volume 359, Issue 9315, 20 April 2002, Pages 1373-1378
The Lancet

Articles
Causes of prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: a prospective study

https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)08350-2Get rights and content

Summary

Background

To prevent errors made during the prescription of drugs, we need to know why they arise. Theories of human error used to understand the causes of mistakes made in high-risk industries are being used in health-care. They have not, however, been applied to prescribing errors, which are a great cause of patient harm. Our aim was to use this approach to investigate the causes of such errors.

Methods

Pharmacists at a UK teaching hospital prospectively identified 88 potentially serious prescribing errors. We interviewed the prescribers who made 44 of these, and analysed our findings with human error theory.

Findings

Our results suggest that most mistakes were made because of slips in attention, or because prescribers did not apply relevant rules. Doctors identified many risk factors—work environment, workload, whether or not they were prescribing for their own patient, communication within their team, physical and mental well-being, and lack of knowledge. Organisational factors were also identified, and included inadequate training, low perceived importance of prescribing, a hierarchical medical team, and an absence of self-awareness of errors.

Interpretation

To reduce prescribing errors, hospitals should train junior doctors in the principles of drug dosing before they start prescribing, and enforce good practice in documentation. They should also create a culture in which prescription writing is seen as important, and formally review interventions made by pharmacists, locum arrangements, and the workload of junior doctors, and make doctors aware of situations in which they are likely to commit errors.

Introduction

Prescribers are human, and therefore make mistakes. In the past, the response to such mistakes has been to focus on personal accountability, whatever the circumstances. However, the systems in which people work also contribute to errors. Findings of studies of industrial errors, and from the discipline of human psychology, have resulted in development of frameworks to analyse the causes of errors and to suggest solutions. Reason1 developed one such framework, which has been applied to medical error2 and is the theoretical basis behind our study (figure 1).

Errors made during drug prescription are the most common type of avoidable medication error, and are hence an important target for improvement.3, 4 In the UK, the Department of Health is committed to reducing by 40% the number of serious errors involving prescribed drugs, by 2005.5 Similar initiatives have been proposed in the USA.6 To achieve such a reduction in mistakes, we first need to understand the frequency and cause of errors. In this prospective pilot study in a UK hospital we have defined prescribing errors, measured their incidence,8 and aimed to understand their causes.

Section snippets

Study participants

Between Oct 18, 1999, and Dec 12, 1999, we asked pharmacists working at a 550-bed teaching hospital to prospectively inform one of us (BD) of any potentially serious prescribing errors made by doctors for inpatients. This hospital operates a typical ward pharmacy service. Briefly, such a service involves prescribers writing medication orders for inpatients by hand onto a formated drug chart. This document is used by nursing staff to ascertain the doses due at each medication round and to record

Results

88 potentially serious errors were reported. We identified the prescriber who made 50 (57%) of these errors, and contacted all 46 doctors; four doctors made two mistakes each. In six instances, the prescriber did not wish to be interviewed because they were too stressed (two), were too busy (two), could not remember writing the prescription (one), or had already been interviewed and felt there was nothing new to say (one). We therefore did 44 interviews with 41 doctors; three doctors being

Discussion

Our results suggest that the human error theory can be used to identify the causes of potentially serious prescribing errors. Although prescribers must be accountable for their actions, our findings indicate that errors usually arise as a result of other factors. Prescribing errors could be reduced by training, adherence to existing systems of work, and through the introduction of new working practices.

Junior doctors should be trained in how to ascertain the correct dose of a drug and its

References (26)

  • J Reason

    Human error

    (1990)
  • C Vincent et al.

    How to investigate and analyse clinical incidents: Clinical Risk Unit and Association of Litigation and Risk Management Protocol

    BMJ

    (2000)
  • LL Leape et al.

    Systems analysis of adverse drug events

    JAMA

    (1995)
  • DW Bates et al.

    Incidence of adverse drug events and potential adverse drug events: implications for prevention

    JAMA

    (1995)
  • An organisation with a memory

    (2000)
  • To err is human: building a safer health system—report of the Committee on Quality of Health Care in America

    (2000)
  • BS Dean, M Schachter, C Vincent, ND Barber, Prescribing errors in hospital inpatients: their incidence and clinical...
  • C Vincent et al.

    Framework for analysing risk and safety in clinical practice

    BMJ

    (1998)
  • TS Lesar et al.

    Medication prescribing errors in a teaching hospital

    JAMA

    (1990)
  • TS Lesar et al.

    Factors related to errors in medication prescribing

    JAMA

    (1997)
  • TS Lesar et al.

    Medication-prescribing errors in a teaching hospital

    Arch Intern Med

    (1997)
  • JA Vitillo et al.

    Preventing medication prescribing errors

    DICP

    (1991)
  • D McEwan

    An evidence-based approach for the development of a prescribing error policy, MSc thesis

    (1999)
  • Cited by (500)

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text