Prescribing errors intercepted by pharmacist intervention in care of patients hospitalised with breast and gynaecological cancer at a Brazilian teaching hospital

• Published in: European journal of cancer care Vol. 27; no. 1; pp. e12767 - n/a
• Main Authors: Ferracini, A.C., Rodrigues, A.T., Barros, A.A., Derchain, S.F., Mazzola, P.G.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: England Hindawi Limited 01.01.2018
• Subjects: Anti-Infective Agents - therapeutic use; Brazil; Breast; Breast cancer; Breast Neoplasms - therapy; Cancer; Cardiovascular Agents - therapeutic use; Central Nervous System Agents - therapeutic use; Cross-Sectional Studies; Digestive tract; Drug interaction; Drug Interactions; drug prescriptions; Drugs; Female; Gastrointestinal Agents - therapeutic use; Genital Neoplasms, Female - therapy; Gynecological cancer; Gynecology; Hematinics - therapeutic use; Hospitalization; Hospitals, Teaching; Humans; Medical errors; Medical Staff, Hospital; medication errors; Medication Errors - statistics & numerical data; Metabolism; Nervous system; Nursing; patient safety; Patients; Pharmacists; Prescriptions; Professional Role; Prospective Studies; Quantitative analysis; Brazil; drug prescriptions; patient safety; medication errors
• ISSN: 0961-5423; 1365-2354
• DOI: 10.1111/ecc.12767

Oncologic inpatients often require multiple drug therapy. They may be at higher risk of experiencing prescribing errors, which pharmacist interventions may help to avoid. This study aimed to evaluate the types of prescribing errors, pharmaceutical interventions and differences in clinical significance, in prescriptions for hospitalised patients with breast and gynaecological cancer. A cross‐sectional, prospective study was conducted at the oncology ward of a clinic specialised in breast and gynaecology cancer. A clinical pharmacist analysed prescriptions, identified errors, performed interventions and classified clinical significance. A total of 1,874 prescriptions of 248 patients were evaluated; 11.5% prescriptions were involved at least in one prescribing error, totalising 283 errors. The most common error was unsafe medication due to drug interaction (89[31.4%]). Drugs for the alimentary tract and metabolism, and nervous system were the most involved in errors with statistical association (p = .0246 and p = .0002 respectively). Of the 294 interventions, 73.5% were accepted. The clinical significance of prescribing errors and interventions were classified as significant and very significant respectively. The pharmacist interventions obtained a good acceptance rate and impact significantly, avoiding prescribing errors classified as significant.