Aims: Prescribing errors among junior doctors are common in clinical practice because many lack prescribing competence after graduation. This is in part due to inadequate education in clinical pharmacology and therapeutics (CP&T) in the undergraduate medical curriculum. To support CP&T education, it is important to determine which drugs medical undergraduates should be able to prescribe safely and effectively without direct supervision by the time they graduate. Currently, there is no such list with broad-based consensus. Therefore, the aim was to reach consensus on a list of essential drugs for undergraduate medical education in the Netherlands. Methods: A two-round modified Delphi study was conducted among pharmacists, medical specialists, junior doctors and pharmacotherapy teachers from all eight Dutch academic hospitals. Participants were asked to indicate whether it was essential that medical graduates could prescribe specific drugs included on a preliminary list. Drugs for which ≥80% of all respondents agreed or strongly agreed were included in the final list. Results: In all, 42 (65%) participants completed the two Delphi rounds. A total of 132 drugs (39%) from the preliminary list and two (3%) newly proposed drugs were included. Conclusions: This is the first Delphi consensus study to identify the drugs that Dutch junior doctors should be able to prescribe safely and effectively without direct supervision. This list can be used to harmonize and support the teaching and assessment of CP&T. Moreover, this study shows that a Delphi method is suitable to reach consensus on such a list, and could be used for a European list.
MULTIFILE
from the repository of Utrecht University: "PURPOSE: Previously, a high prevalence of certain psychiatric disorders was shown among non-Western immigrants. This study explores whether this results in more prescriptions for psychotropic medication. METHODS: Data on dispensing of medication among adults living in the four largest Dutch cities in 2013 were linked to demographic data from Statistics Netherlands. Incident (i.e., following no dispensing in 2010-2012) and prevalent dispensing among immigrants was compared to that among native Dutch (N = 1,043,732) and analyzed using multivariable Poisson and logistic regression. RESULTS: High adjusted Odds Ratios (ORadj) of prevalent and high Incidence Rate Ratios (IRRadj) of incident dispensing of antipsychotics were found among Moroccan (N = 115,455) and Turkish individuals (N = 105,460), especially among young Moroccan males (ORadj = 3.22 [2.99-3.47]). Among Surinamese (N = 147,123) and Antillean individuals (N = 41,430), slightly higher rates of dispensed antipsychotics were found and the estimates decreased after adjustment. The estimates for antipsychotic dispensing among the Moroccan and Turkish increased, following adjustment for household composition. Rates for antidepressant dispensing among Turkish and Moroccan subjects were high (Moroccans: ORadj = 1.74 [1.70-1.78]). Among Surinamese and Antillean subjects, the rates for antidepressant dispensing were low and the ORadjlagged behind the IRRadj(Surinamese: 0.69 [0.67-0.71] vs. 1.06 [1.00-1.13]). Similar results were found for anxiolytics. For ADHD medication, lower dispensing rates were found among all migrant groups. CONCLUSIONS: The findings agree with earlier reports of more mental health problems among Moroccan and Turkish individuals. Surinamese/Antillean individuals did not use psychotropic drugs at excess and discontinued antidepressants and anxiolytics earlier. The data strongly suggest under-treatment for ADHD in all ethnic minority groups."
LINK
Aim: In-hospital prescribing errors (PEs) may result in patient harm, prolonged hospitalization and hospital (re)admission. These events are associated with pressure on healthcare services and significant healthcare costs. To develop targeted interventions to prevent or reduce in-hospital PEs, identification and understanding of facilitating and protective factors influencing in-hospital PEs in current daily practice is necessary, adopting a Safety-II perspective. The aim of this systematic review was to create an overview of all factors reported in the literature, both protective and facilitating, as influencing in-hospital PEs. Methods: PubMed, EMBASE.com and the Cochrane Library (via Wiley) were searched, according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, for studies that identified factors influencing in-hospital PEs. Both qualitative and quantitative study designs were included. Results: Overall, 19 articles (6 qualitative and 13 quantitative studies) were included and 40 unique factors influencing in-hospital PEs were identified. These factors were categorized into five domains according to the Eindhoven classification (‘organization-related’, ‘prescriber-related’, ‘prescription-related’, ‘technologyrelated’ and ‘unclassified’) and visualized in an Ishikawa (Fishbone) diagram. Most of the identified factors (87.5%; n = 40) facilitated in-hospital PEs. The most frequently identified facilitating factor (39.6%; n = 19) was ‘insufficient (drug) knowledge, prescribing skills and/or experience of prescribers’. Conclusion: The findings of this review could be used to identify points of engagement for future intervention studies and help hospitals determine how to optimize prescribing. A multifaceted intervention, targeting multiple factors might help to circumvent the complex challenge of in-hospital PEs.
MULTIFILE
