Premium
Staff experience and perceptions of the safety and risks of electronic medication management systems in Victorian public hospitals
Author(s) -
Van de Vreede Melita,
Clifford Jan,
McGrath Anne
Publication year - 2018
Publication title -
journal of pharmacy practice and research
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.222
H-Index - 22
eISSN - 2055-2335
pISSN - 1445-937X
DOI - 10.1002/jppr.1327
Subject(s) - medicine , patient safety , near miss , perception , electronic prescribing , medical emergency , nursing , family medicine , health care , pharmacy , psychology , forensic engineering , neuroscience , engineering , economics , economic growth
Background Victorian hospitals are at various stages of transition to electronic medication management system ( EMMS ). Although improvements in medication safety and error reduction are assumed when using an EMMS, concerns have been raised regarding potential unintended consequences and possible new error types, so information from frontline staff using EMMS s provides an insight into their safety and some of the risks associated with their use. Aim The aims of this study were to determine the perceptions of frontline staff using an EMMS regarding the safety of the EMMS and the potential for new errors or those errors that were more likely with the use of an EMMS , and providing this feedback to the participating organisations. Method Frontline clinical staff in eight Victorian hospitals using EMMS were invited to participate in voluntary, anonymous online survey designed and analysed by experienced medication safety pharmacists. Results Respondents ( n = 664) included medical officers (30%) nurses (49%) and pharmacists (16%). Forty‐eight percent of respondents have observed, investigated or reviewed errors/near misses in EMMS . Fifty‐six percent believe that these errors/near misses are a new type of error related to EMMS . Top issues identified by those involved in an error (195) were incorrect patient selection and incorrect dose scheduling, resulting in dose duplication. Fifty‐six percent agree or strongly agree that EMMS has reduced the potential for medication errors and 58% consider that EMMS has introduced new types of errors. The most significant issues raised about EMMS were time‐consuming and non‐intuitive processes and overdependence on technology. Conclusion Staff experience and perception of EMMS was overall positive, most considering that medication error risk is reduced, but safety concerns remain to be addressed.