Nurse Practitioner and General Practitioner Error Rates in a Large Digital Health Service: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

IF 2.4 Q1 NURSING Nursing Reports Pub Date : 2024-11-07 DOI:10.3390/nursrep14040246
Louis Talay, Matt Vickers, Daisy Lu
{"title":"Nurse Practitioner and General Practitioner Error Rates in a Large Digital Health Service: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.","authors":"Louis Talay, Matt Vickers, Daisy Lu","doi":"10.3390/nursrep14040246","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Nurse practitioners have been prescribing medication within a narrow scope of practice throughout the world for several decades as a means of meeting rising demand for community health services. Prominent medical bodies have alleged that the Australian government's decision to remove the need for general practitioner collaboration in the context of a nurse practitioner prescribing medication compromises patient safety.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>This study aimed to determine whether nurse practitioner prescribing increases patient risk relative to general practitioner prescribing in a large digital health service.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Investigators retrospectively analyzed prescription errors from all audited consults of the Eucalyptus Australia service over a 6 month period between 1 October 2023 and 31 March 2024.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 8359 consults, errors were observed in 911 (14.22%) of NP and 417 (21.37%) of general practitioner consults and this difference was found to be statistically significant, <i>X</i><sup>2</sup> (1, N = 8359), =57.33, <i>p</i> ≤ 0.001. No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of high-risk or never events between nurse practitioners and general practitioners. Most high-risk and never events pertained to medical contraindications, insufficient side-effect counselling, and the insufficient assessment of a patient's medical history.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These findings suggest that nurse practitioners are capable of safely performing patient assessments and prescribing medications for a select range of conditions in digital health services.</p>","PeriodicalId":40753,"journal":{"name":"Nursing Reports","volume":"14 4","pages":"3407-3416"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11587444/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nursing Reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/nursrep14040246","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Nurse practitioners have been prescribing medication within a narrow scope of practice throughout the world for several decades as a means of meeting rising demand for community health services. Prominent medical bodies have alleged that the Australian government's decision to remove the need for general practitioner collaboration in the context of a nurse practitioner prescribing medication compromises patient safety.

Objectives: This study aimed to determine whether nurse practitioner prescribing increases patient risk relative to general practitioner prescribing in a large digital health service.

Methods: Investigators retrospectively analyzed prescription errors from all audited consults of the Eucalyptus Australia service over a 6 month period between 1 October 2023 and 31 March 2024.

Results: Of the 8359 consults, errors were observed in 911 (14.22%) of NP and 417 (21.37%) of general practitioner consults and this difference was found to be statistically significant, X2 (1, N = 8359), =57.33, p ≤ 0.001. No statistically significant difference was observed in the incidence of high-risk or never events between nurse practitioners and general practitioners. Most high-risk and never events pertained to medical contraindications, insufficient side-effect counselling, and the insufficient assessment of a patient's medical history.

Conclusion: These findings suggest that nurse practitioners are capable of safely performing patient assessments and prescribing medications for a select range of conditions in digital health services.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
大型数字医疗服务中执业护士和全科医生的出错率:回顾性队列分析
背景:几十年来,世界各地的执业护士一直在狭窄的执业范围内开具处方,以满足日益增长的社区卫生服务需求。著名的医疗机构声称,澳大利亚政府决定在执业护士开具处方的情况下取消与全科医生合作的必要性,这有损于患者的安全:本研究旨在确定在大型数字医疗服务机构中,相对于全科医生开药,护士开药是否会增加患者风险:研究人员回顾性分析了2023年10月1日至2024年3月31日的6个月期间,澳大利亚桉树公司服务的所有审计咨询中出现的处方错误:在 8359 次咨询中,911 次(14.22%)非专科医生咨询和 417 次(21.37%)全科医生咨询中发现了错误,这一差异具有统计学意义,X2 (1, N = 8359), =57.33, p ≤ 0.001。在高风险事件或从未发生事件的发生率方面,执业护士和全科医生之间没有发现明显的统计学差异。大多数高风险事件和从未发生的事件与医疗禁忌症、副作用咨询不足以及对患者病史评估不足有关:这些研究结果表明,在数字医疗服务中,执业护士能够安全地对患者进行评估,并针对特定病症开具处方。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Nursing Reports
Nursing Reports NURSING-
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
4.20%
发文量
78
期刊介绍: Nursing Reports is an open access, peer-reviewed, online-only journal that aims to influence the art and science of nursing by making rigorously conducted research accessible and understood to the full spectrum of practicing nurses, academics, educators and interested members of the public. The journal represents an exhilarating opportunity to make a unique and significant contribution to nursing and the wider community by addressing topics, theories and issues that concern the whole field of Nursing Science, including research, practice, policy and education. The primary intent of the journal is to present scientifically sound and influential empirical and theoretical studies, critical reviews and open debates to the global community of nurses. Short reports, opinions and insight into the plight of nurses the world-over will provide a voice for those of all cultures, governments and perspectives. The emphasis of Nursing Reports will be on ensuring that the highest quality of evidence and contribution is made available to the greatest number of nurses. Nursing Reports aims to make original, evidence-based, peer-reviewed research available to the global community of nurses and to interested members of the public. In addition, reviews of the literature, open debates on professional issues and short reports from around the world are invited to contribute to our vibrant and dynamic journal. All published work will adhere to the most stringent ethical standards and journalistic principles of fairness, worth and credibility. Our journal publishes Editorials, Original Articles, Review articles, Critical Debates, Short Reports from Around the Globe and Letters to the Editor.
期刊最新文献
Conflict Management in Nursing: Analyzing Styles, Strategies, and Influencing Factors: A Systematic Review. Missing Fundamental Nursing Care: What's the Extent of Missed Oral Care? A Cross-Sectional Study. Psychometric Properties of the Lactation Assessment and Comprehensive Intervention Tool (LAT). Exploring Nurses' and Nursing Students' Attitudes Toward Coercive and Technological Measures in Mental Health: A Conceptual Framework and Study Protocol. Feasibility of Mental Health Triage Call Priority Prediction Using Machine Learning.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1