English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

QUESTION ASKED:   In the United States, research has found that oral chemotherapy is subject to fewer safeguards than are in routine use for intravenous (IV) chemotherapy; however, less is known about the Canadian context. The objective of this study was to determine whether similar safeguards, in the form of independent checks, existed to identify potential errors related to IV and oral chemotherapy formulations in a particular cancer system.SUMMARY ANSWER:   In the cancer system studied, a total of 57 systematic checks were identified for IV chemotherapy, whereas only six systematic checks were identified for oral chemotherapy. Community pharmacists were the only qualified professionals involved in independent, systematic checking of oral chemotherapy, which occurred during ordering and dispensing.METHODS:   Human factors specialists conducted observations and interviews in cancer center clinics, a cancer center pharmacy, and four community pharmacies across Nova Scotia. Processes were analyzed to determine whether an independent check was performed, which qualified provider completed the check, and at what point of the process the check occurred.BIAS, CONFOUNDING FACTOR(S), DRAWBACKS:   This study had some limitations. Although there are many forms of safeguards (eg, preprinted orders), only one type of safeguard (ie, independent checks) was examined in the cancer system studied. We chose to focus on independent checks because they were observable and were defined in the cancer center’s policies. Another limitation was that just a single jurisdiction (Nova Scotia), and four community pharmacies were examined. We examined each community pharmacy in detail, and sites were chosen to be representative (eg, rural versus urban). Further, the model used to deliver oral chemotherapy in Nova Scotia is not unique; a number of other provinces share similar models.REAL-LIFE IMPLICATIONS:   There is an enormous opportunity for pharmacists and other qualified professionals to take on an expanded role in improving patient safety for oral chemotherapy. Oral chemotherapy, like IV chemotherapy, is known to be potentially hazardous, but in the cancer system studied, there were dramatically fewer independent checks associated with all aspects of oral chemotherapy–related processes. Greater involvement of pharmacists, both in the clinic environment and the community, would facilitate increased systematic checking, which could improve patient safety related to oral chemotherapy. [Figure: see text]

ReCAP: Comparison of Independent Error Checks for Oral Versus Intravenous Chemotherapy