Cargando…

Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015

IMPORTANCE: While much is known about hospital pharmacy error rates in the USA, comparatively little is known about community pharmacy dispensing error rates. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the rate of community pharmacy dispensing errors in the USA. METHODS: English language, pee...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Campbell, Patrick J, Patel, Mira, Martin, Jennifer R, Hincapie, Ana L, Axon, David Rhys, Warholak, Terri L, Slack, Marion
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BMJ Publishing Group 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173242/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30306141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000193
_version_ 1783361093202083840
author Campbell, Patrick J
Patel, Mira
Martin, Jennifer R
Hincapie, Ana L
Axon, David Rhys
Warholak, Terri L
Slack, Marion
author_facet Campbell, Patrick J
Patel, Mira
Martin, Jennifer R
Hincapie, Ana L
Axon, David Rhys
Warholak, Terri L
Slack, Marion
author_sort Campbell, Patrick J
collection PubMed
description IMPORTANCE: While much is known about hospital pharmacy error rates in the USA, comparatively little is known about community pharmacy dispensing error rates. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the rate of community pharmacy dispensing errors in the USA. METHODS: English language, peer-reviewed observational and interventional studies that reported community pharmacy dispensing error rates in the USA from January 1993 to December 2015 were identified in 10 bibliographic databases and topic-relevant grey literature. Studies with a denominator reflecting the total number of prescriptions in the sample were necessary for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate an aggregate community pharmacy dispensing error rate. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic prior to analysis. RESULTS: The search yielded a total of 8490 records, of which 11 articles were included in the systematic review. Two articles did not have adequate data components to be included in the meta-analysis. Dispensing error rates ranged from 0.00003% (43/1 420 091) to 55% (55/100). The meta-analysis included 1 461 128 prescriptions. The overall community pharmacy dispensing error rate was estimated to be 0.015 (95% CI 0.014 to 0.018); however, significant heterogeneity was observed across studies (I(2)=99.6). Stratification by study error identification methodology was found to have a significant impact on dispensing error rate (p<0.001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: There are few published articles that describe community pharmacy dispensing error rates in the USA. Thus, there is limited information about the current rate of community pharmacy dispensing errors. A robust investigation is needed to assess dispensing error rates in the USA to assess the nature and magnitude of the problem and establish prevention strategies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6173242
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61732422018-10-10 Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015 Campbell, Patrick J Patel, Mira Martin, Jennifer R Hincapie, Ana L Axon, David Rhys Warholak, Terri L Slack, Marion BMJ Open Qual Systematic Reviews IMPORTANCE: While much is known about hospital pharmacy error rates in the USA, comparatively little is known about community pharmacy dispensing error rates. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the rate of community pharmacy dispensing errors in the USA. METHODS: English language, peer-reviewed observational and interventional studies that reported community pharmacy dispensing error rates in the USA from January 1993 to December 2015 were identified in 10 bibliographic databases and topic-relevant grey literature. Studies with a denominator reflecting the total number of prescriptions in the sample were necessary for inclusion in the meta-analysis. A random effects meta-analysis was conducted to estimate an aggregate community pharmacy dispensing error rate. Heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic prior to analysis. RESULTS: The search yielded a total of 8490 records, of which 11 articles were included in the systematic review. Two articles did not have adequate data components to be included in the meta-analysis. Dispensing error rates ranged from 0.00003% (43/1 420 091) to 55% (55/100). The meta-analysis included 1 461 128 prescriptions. The overall community pharmacy dispensing error rate was estimated to be 0.015 (95% CI 0.014 to 0.018); however, significant heterogeneity was observed across studies (I(2)=99.6). Stratification by study error identification methodology was found to have a significant impact on dispensing error rate (p<0.001). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: There are few published articles that describe community pharmacy dispensing error rates in the USA. Thus, there is limited information about the current rate of community pharmacy dispensing errors. A robust investigation is needed to assess dispensing error rates in the USA to assess the nature and magnitude of the problem and establish prevention strategies. BMJ Publishing Group 2018-10-02 /pmc/articles/PMC6173242/ /pubmed/30306141 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000193 Text en © Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ. This is an open access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited, appropriate credit is given, any changes made indicated, and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
spellingShingle Systematic Reviews
Campbell, Patrick J
Patel, Mira
Martin, Jennifer R
Hincapie, Ana L
Axon, David Rhys
Warholak, Terri L
Slack, Marion
Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title_full Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title_fullStr Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title_full_unstemmed Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title_short Systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the USA: 1993–2015
title_sort systematic review and meta-analysis of community pharmacy error rates in the usa: 1993–2015
topic Systematic Reviews
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6173242/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30306141
http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjoq-2017-000193
work_keys_str_mv AT campbellpatrickj systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT patelmira systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT martinjenniferr systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT hincapieanal systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT axondavidrhys systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT warholakterril systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015
AT slackmarion systematicreviewandmetaanalysisofcommunitypharmacyerrorratesintheusa19932015