Medication errors: electronic vs. paper-based prescribing. Experience at a tertiary care university hospital

Abstract

Purpose: It has been estimated that medication errors (ME) are responsible for 7000 deaths each year. Some studies show that electronic prescribing systems have achieved health benefits and patient safety, resulting in a saving of resources. Other studies suggest that they may increase adverse events.

Objective: The objective of this study was to compare medication errors between electronic and paper-based prescription detected during pharmacovigilance.

Methods: This was an observational, cross-sectional comparative study of 600 randomized medical records that were systematically reviewed by a pharmacovigilance team, with a deliberate search for ME. Each error was classified according to its severity, National Coordinating Council for Medication Error and Prevention taxonomy and high-risk medications. The number of errors was calculated per 100 prescribed medications, number of errors per record and number of records with an error as a quality indicator.

Results: A total of 229 ME were found with a mean per record of 0.38 (SD = 0.7), of which 155 corresponded to the paper-based method (1.04, SD = 1.67) and 74 to the electronic-based method (0.29, SD = 0.57) P = <0.001. The use of the electronic method was associated with an OR of 0.59 (95% CI 0.41-0.85) for the recording of at least one ME (P = 0.005), but to a greater severity of ME (<0.001).

Conclusion: The use of the electronic system was associated with a reduction in ME, compared with the paper-based method. Despite this, it was associated with more severe ME.

Keywords: electronic prescribing; medication errors; paper-based prescribing.