MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional study was carried out to evaluate the prescribing, and dispensing errors in outpatients who seek patient counseling at the tertiary care multispecialty hospital. The data were collected from various sources such as patient's prescriptions and dispensing records from the pharmacy.
RESULTS: A total of 500 prescriptions were screened and identified 65.60% of prescriptions with at least any one type of medication errors. Out of 328 prescriptions, 96.04% were handwritten and 3.96% were computerised prescriptions. Among the 328 prescriptions with medication errors, 32.62% noticed prescribing errors, 37.80% with dispensing errors, and 29.58% with both prescribing and dispensing errors. Out of these 328 prescriptions, 74.09% prescriptions were found to have polypharmacy.
DISCUSSION: Medication errors are serious problems in healthcare and can be a source of significant morbidity and mortality in healthcare settings. The present study showed that dispensing errors were the most common among the types of medication errors, in these particularly wrong directions were the most common types of errors.
CONCLUSION: This study concludes that the overall prevalence of medication errors was around 80%, but there were no life-threatening events observed. A clinical pharmacist can play a major role in this situation appears to be a strong intervention and early detection and prevention of medication errors and thus can improve the quality of care to the patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: All patients admitted to the five geriatric medicine wards in a geriatric department over a 5- month period who developed acute retention of urine were included in the project. Patients who had hydronephrosis or were already on catheter for more than a week were excluded. Patients included were randomised to PVRU of 200 ml or 300ml. The male and female participants were randomised into separate groups. The primary outcome measures were success in weaning off IMC and the development of urinary tract infection (UTI). The secondary outcomes were the frequency of IMC required and the days needed to wean off IMC successfully.
RESULTS: Both the 200 ml and 300 ml groups had equal success in weaning off IMC and were equally likely to be associated with UTI. However, the 200-ml group had more IMC done within the first 3 days (3.3, SD 2.4 vs 2.4, SD 1.6, p = 0.030), but was weaned off IMC earlier (3.5, SD 1.7, vs 4.8, SD 2.3 days, p = 0.049).
CONCLUSION: We conclude that PVRU of 200 ml or 300 ml are both reasonable cut-off values prior to performing IMC.
METHODS: A prospective cross-sectional observational study was conducted among the patients admitted to the medical and surgical wards in a public hospital located in Brunei Darussalam between February 2022 and April 2022. Hospitalized adults above 18 years old with regular medications with a minimum length of stay of 48 h and a maximum length of stay of 21 days were included in the study. These eligible patients were divided into a POM group and a non-POM group. The economic analysis of using POM was performed by calculating the direct cost per unit of medication used during admission (from unit-use, ward stock and POM) and comparing the cost spent for both groups. Expired ward stock deemed as medication wastage was determined. Medical research ethics were approved, and all participating patients had given their written informed consent before enrolling in this study.
RESULTS: A total of 112 patients aged 63.2 ± 15.8 years participated in this study. The average cost of medication supplied by the inpatient pharmacy for the non-POM group was USD 21.60 ± 34.20 per patient, whereas, for the POM group, it was approximately USD 13.00 ± 18.30 per patient, with a mean difference of USD 8.60 ± 5.17 per patient (95% CI: -3.95, 27.47, p ≥ 0.05). The use of POM minimized 54.03% (USD 625.04) of the total cost spent by the hospital for the POM group within the period of the study.
CONCLUSION: The pilot study showed that the supplied medication cost per patient was not significantly different between the POM and non-POM groups. Nevertheless, the utilization of POM during hospitalization is capable of reducing at least 50% of the total cost spent on inpatient medications by the hospital. The use of POM during hospitalization also helped in reducing the total time spent on the medication process per patient.