PLoS ONE (Jan 2014)

Prevalence and causes of prescribing errors: the PRescribing Outcomes for Trainee Doctors Engaged in Clinical Training (PROTECT) study.

  • Cristín Ryan,
  • Sarah Ross,
  • Peter Davey,
  • Eilidh M Duncan,
  • Jill J Francis,
  • Shona Fielding,
  • Marie Johnston,
  • Jean Ker,
  • Amanda Jane Lee,
  • Mary Joan MacLeod,
  • Simon Maxwell,
  • Gerard A McKay,
  • James S McLay,
  • David J Webb,
  • Christine Bond

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0079802
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 9, no. 1
p. e79802

Abstract

Read online

ObjectivesStudy objectives were to investigate the prevalence and causes of prescribing errors amongst foundation doctors (i.e. junior doctors in their first (F1) or second (F2) year of post-graduate training), describe their knowledge and experience of prescribing errors, and explore their self-efficacy (i.e. confidence) in prescribing.MethodA three-part mixed-methods design was used, comprising: prospective observational study; semi-structured interviews and cross-sectional survey. All doctors prescribing in eight purposively selected hospitals in Scotland participated. All foundation doctors throughout Scotland participated in the survey. The number of prescribing errors per patient, doctor, ward and hospital, perceived causes of errors and a measure of doctors' self-efficacy were established.Results4710 patient charts and 44,726 prescribed medicines were reviewed. There were 3364 errors, affecting 1700 (36.1%) charts (overall error rate: 7.5%; F1:7.4%; F2:8.6%; consultants:6.3%). Higher error rates were associated with : teaching hospitals (pConclusionsPrescribing errors are frequent and of complex causation. Foundation doctors made more errors than other doctors, but undertook the majority of prescribing, making them a key target for intervention. Contributing causes included work environment, team, task, individual and patient factors. Further work is needed to develop and assess interventions that address these.