M. J. Ayre, P. J. Lewis, D. L. Phipps, R. N. Keers
{"title":"Understanding the causes of preventable medication incidents for patients with mental illness in primary care","authors":"M. J. Ayre, P. J. Lewis, D. L. Phipps, R. N. Keers","doi":"10.1093/ijpp/riad074.008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"A recent scoping review has highlighted that whilst patients with mental illness are commonly affected by medication errors and preventable adverse drug events in primary care, there were limited data regarding their causes1. By understanding why these preventable events occur, targeted interventions can be developed. To understand the nature and contributory factors that lead to medication errors and preventable adverse drug events amongst patients with mental illness in primary care. This study used a qualitative design. A researcher remotely interviewed 26 healthcare professionals (14 pharmacists, 5 GPs, 5 nurses, 2 psychiatrists) working in primary care between June-November 2022, guided by the critical incident technique. Professionals were recruited via social media, research team networks, and snowballing. Data were analysed using the framework method and any data that involved speculation as to the causes of errors was not included. The data were organised into themes based on the London protocol error framework, which describes the contributory factors leading to care delivery problems2. Themes generated were validated by other members of the research team and a patient advisory group. This study was approved by the University of Manchester Ethics Committee 1 (reference 2022-13735-23555). Forty-three medication errors and twelve preventable adverse drug events were discussed during interview. Prescribing errors were discussed most commonly (n=24) and administration errors least commonly (n=4). Six contributory factors were identified which were: the individual (staff) (n=37); the work environment (n=31); the teams/interfaces (n=28); the organisation and management (n=24); the patient (n=23); and the task and technology (n=15). Primary care clinicians reported a lack of knowledge regarding psychotropics and mental illness which accompanied diffusion of responsibility. The responsibilities of staff were also confused by limited clinical information communicated between teams and across care interfaces. Service demand was reported to exceed capacity, creating stress for the staff, as well as limiting the time available for staff to undergo training. Complicated patient lifestyles and behavioural challenges were reported as unique contributory factors. Lack of knowledge amongst primary care clinicians regarding psychotropics and mental illness was a key issue. This was exacerbated by a mental health service structure placing considerable pressure on primary care leaving clinicians to support patients with needs perceived to be outside their areas of confidence and competence. There is a need to support this workforce by upskilling them to effectively manage patients by addressing the educational needs regarding neuropharmacology and communication skills. These changes may have a positive effect in reducing error rates for this patient group in primary care. Study limitations include recall bias, social desirability bias, as well as the majority errors discussed were made by another clinician within a chain therefore critical details may be missing in the series of events. This is the first study to identify the nature and contributory factors of preventable medication incidents for patients with mental illness in primary care. Future research should focus on exploring this topic from the perspective of patients to better understand the causes of preventable medication incidents. 1. Ayre M, Lewis P, Keers R. Understanding the medication safety challenges for patients with mental illness in primary care: a scoping review. BMC Psychiatry. 2023;In Press. 2. Taylor-Adams S, Vincent C. Systems analysis of clinical incidents: the London protocol. Clinical Risk. 2004;10(6):211-20.","PeriodicalId":14284,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/ijpp/riad074.008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
A recent scoping review has highlighted that whilst patients with mental illness are commonly affected by medication errors and preventable adverse drug events in primary care, there were limited data regarding their causes1. By understanding why these preventable events occur, targeted interventions can be developed. To understand the nature and contributory factors that lead to medication errors and preventable adverse drug events amongst patients with mental illness in primary care. This study used a qualitative design. A researcher remotely interviewed 26 healthcare professionals (14 pharmacists, 5 GPs, 5 nurses, 2 psychiatrists) working in primary care between June-November 2022, guided by the critical incident technique. Professionals were recruited via social media, research team networks, and snowballing. Data were analysed using the framework method and any data that involved speculation as to the causes of errors was not included. The data were organised into themes based on the London protocol error framework, which describes the contributory factors leading to care delivery problems2. Themes generated were validated by other members of the research team and a patient advisory group. This study was approved by the University of Manchester Ethics Committee 1 (reference 2022-13735-23555). Forty-three medication errors and twelve preventable adverse drug events were discussed during interview. Prescribing errors were discussed most commonly (n=24) and administration errors least commonly (n=4). Six contributory factors were identified which were: the individual (staff) (n=37); the work environment (n=31); the teams/interfaces (n=28); the organisation and management (n=24); the patient (n=23); and the task and technology (n=15). Primary care clinicians reported a lack of knowledge regarding psychotropics and mental illness which accompanied diffusion of responsibility. The responsibilities of staff were also confused by limited clinical information communicated between teams and across care interfaces. Service demand was reported to exceed capacity, creating stress for the staff, as well as limiting the time available for staff to undergo training. Complicated patient lifestyles and behavioural challenges were reported as unique contributory factors. Lack of knowledge amongst primary care clinicians regarding psychotropics and mental illness was a key issue. This was exacerbated by a mental health service structure placing considerable pressure on primary care leaving clinicians to support patients with needs perceived to be outside their areas of confidence and competence. There is a need to support this workforce by upskilling them to effectively manage patients by addressing the educational needs regarding neuropharmacology and communication skills. These changes may have a positive effect in reducing error rates for this patient group in primary care. Study limitations include recall bias, social desirability bias, as well as the majority errors discussed were made by another clinician within a chain therefore critical details may be missing in the series of events. This is the first study to identify the nature and contributory factors of preventable medication incidents for patients with mental illness in primary care. Future research should focus on exploring this topic from the perspective of patients to better understand the causes of preventable medication incidents. 1. Ayre M, Lewis P, Keers R. Understanding the medication safety challenges for patients with mental illness in primary care: a scoping review. BMC Psychiatry. 2023;In Press. 2. Taylor-Adams S, Vincent C. Systems analysis of clinical incidents: the London protocol. Clinical Risk. 2004;10(6):211-20.
最近的一项范围界定审查强调,虽然精神疾病患者通常会受到初级医疗中用药错误和可预防药物不良事件的影响,但有关其原因的数据却十分有限1。通过了解这些可预防事件发生的原因,可以制定有针对性的干预措施。 本研究旨在了解导致基层医疗机构中精神病患者用药错误和可预防药物不良事件的性质和诱因。 本研究采用定性设计。2022 年 6 月至 11 月期间,在关键事件技术的指导下,一名研究人员对 26 名在基层医疗机构工作的医护人员(14 名药剂师、5 名全科医生、5 名护士和 2 名精神科医生)进行了远程访谈。专业人员是通过社交媒体、研究团队网络和滚雪球的方式招募的。数据采用框架法进行分析,任何涉及错误原因推测的数据都不包括在内。数据根据伦敦协议错误框架组织成主题,该框架描述了导致护理服务问题的促成因素2。研究小组的其他成员和患者咨询小组对所产生的主题进行了验证。本研究获得了曼彻斯特大学伦理委员会 1 的批准(参考文献 2022-13735-23555)。 访谈中讨论了 43 个用药错误和 12 个可预防的药物不良事件。其中处方错误最多(24 例),用药错误最少(4 例)。确定了六个促成因素:个人(员工)(37 人);工作环境(31 人);团队/界面(28 人);组织和管理(24 人);患者(23 人);任务和技术(15 人)。基层医疗机构的临床医生表示,他们缺乏精神药物和精神疾病方面的知识,因此责任分散。团队之间和医疗界面之间交流的临床信息有限,也混淆了工作人员的职责。据报告,服务需求超过了服务能力,给工作人员造成了压力,也限制了工作人员接受培训的时间。据报告,病人复杂的生活方式和行为挑战是独特的促成因素。 初级保健临床医生对精神药物和精神疾病缺乏了解是一个关键问题。心理健康服务结构给基层医疗机构带来了巨大压力,使临床医生不得不为那些被认为超出了他们的信心和能力范围的病人提供支持,从而加剧了这一问题。因此,有必要通过提高他们的技能来支持这支队伍,通过解决神经药理学和沟通技巧方面的教育需求来有效地管理病人。这些改变可能会对降低基层医疗机构中这一患者群体的错误率产生积极影响。研究的局限性包括回忆偏差、社会可取性偏差,以及所讨论的大多数错误是由一连串事件中的另一位临床医生所犯,因此可能会遗漏一系列事件中的关键细节。这是第一项针对基层医疗机构中精神疾病患者可预防用药事件的性质和促成因素的研究。未来的研究应侧重于从患者的角度来探讨这一主题,以更好地了解可预防用药事件的成因。 1.Ayre M, Lewis P, Keers R. Understanding the medication safety challenges for patients with mental illness in primary care: a scoping review.BMC Psychiatry.2023; In Press. 2.Taylor-Adams S, Vincent C. Systems analysis of clinical incidents: the London protocol.临床风险》。2004;10(6):211-20.
期刊介绍:
The International Journal of Pharmacy Practice (IJPP) is a Medline-indexed, peer reviewed, international journal. It is one of the leading journals publishing health services research in the context of pharmacy, pharmaceutical care, medicines and medicines management. Regular sections in the journal include, editorials, literature reviews, original research, personal opinion and short communications. Topics covered include: medicines utilisation, medicine management, medicines distribution, supply and administration, pharmaceutical services, professional and patient/lay perspectives, public health (including, e.g. health promotion, needs assessment, health protection) evidence based practice, pharmacy education. Methods include both evaluative and exploratory work including, randomised controlled trials, surveys, epidemiological approaches, case studies, observational studies, and qualitative methods such as interviews and focus groups. Application of methods drawn from other disciplines e.g. psychology, health economics, morbidity are especially welcome as are developments of new methodologies.