Clinical decision support (CDS) systems were developed to support safe medication ordering, alerting prescribers to potential unsafe interactions such as drug-drug, drug-allergy, and dosing errors. This study uses a sociotechnical framework to understand the relationship between primary care prescribers’ safety work and CDS. Prescribers described the usefulness of CDS but also noted alert fatigue.

Previous research found that a pharmacist-led information technology intervention (PINCER) reduced dangerous prescribing (i.e., medication monitoring and drug-disease errors) among a subset of primary care practices in the United Kingdom (UK). This longitudinal analysis examined the impact of the PINCER intervention after implementation across a large proportion of general practices in one region in the UK. Researchers found the PINCER intervention decreased dangerous prescribing by 17% and 15% at 6-month and 12-month follow-ups, particularly among dangerous prescribing related to gastrointestinal bleeding.

… organizations in e-prescribing system decision making. … Sheikh A, Coleman J, Chuter A, et al.  Programme Grants Appl …

Previous research found that the pharmacist-led IT-based intervention to reduce clinically important medication errors (PINCER) can reduce prescription and medication monitoring errors. This qualitative study explored patients’ perceived acceptability of the PINCER intervention in primary care. Overall perceptions were positive, but participants noted that PINCER acceptability can be improved through enhanced patient-pharmacist relationships, consistent delivery of PINCER-related care, and synchronization of medication reviews with prescription renewals.

… reviewed) and suboptimal prescribing (35%). … Salema NE, Bell B, Marsden K, et al. The frequency and nature of …

Patient safety indicators (PSIs) can be used to identify potential patient safety hazards. Researchers used the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD database to examine prevalence, variation, and patient- and practice-level risk factors for 22 mental health-related PSIs for medication prescribing and monitoring in primary care. The authors found that potentially inappropriate prescribing and inadequate medication monitoring commonly affected patients with mental illness in primary care.

Medication errors represent a significant source of preventable harm. This large meta-analysis, including 81 studies, found that approximately 1 in 30 patients is exposed to preventable medication harm, and more than one-quarter of this harm is considered severe or life-threatening. Preventable medication harm occurred most frequently during medication prescribing and monitoring. The highest rates of preventable medication harm were seen in elderly patient care settings, intensive care, highly specialized or surgical care, and emergency medicine.

… and coordination, and greater continuity of care. … Avery  AJ, Sheehan C, Bell B, et al. Incidence, nature and causes of avoidable …

… care stemmed from errors in dispensing practices (e.g. wrong patient, incorrect dose, incorrect formulation). …

Most patient safety research has focused on tertiary care or specialty care settings, but less is known about safety in primary care settings and there is no clear definition of patient safety incidents and harm occurring in these settings.  The authors convened a panel of family physicians and used a consensus method to define “avoidable harm” within family practice. Most scenarios found to be avoidable and included in the proposed definition involved failure to adhere to evidence-based practice guidelines, lack of timely intervention, or failure in administrative processes, such as referrals or procedures for following up on results.

The extent of harm due to patient safety problems varies across studies. This systematic review sought to estimate the prevalence of preventable harm in medical care overall. Researchers synthesized data from 70 studies and estimated that 6% of patients receiving medical care experience preventable harm. Harm related to medications, diagnosis, health care–associated infections, and procedures accounted for significant proportions of preventable harm. The authors conclude that focusing on evidenced-based strategies to address preventable patient harm would improve health care quality and subsequently reduce costs. A related editorial calls for improving measurement of preventable harm. Another editorial spotlights the importance of understanding the causes of preventable harm in health care.

This study convened focus groups that included the public, patients, and caregivers to define a framework for medication safety problems. Participants described the importance of factors such as communication, supply of medications, health information technology, access to care, and continuity with physicians. The authors suggest that this framework clarifies patient perspectives on medication safety.

Pharmacists enhance medication safety in hospitals and ambulatory settings. The authors interviewed pharmacists about their experience implementing a dashboard that allowed them to identify and provide feedback regarding hazardous medication prescribing in primary care. A WebM&M commentary describes other pharmacy-led efforts to make prescribing safer.

Safe diagnosis is a complex challenge that requires multidisciplinary approaches to achieve lasting improvement. The authors worked with a multidisciplinary panel to build a 10-element framework outlining steps that support conservative diagnosis. Recommendation highlights include a renewed focus on history-taking and physician examination, as discussed in a PSNet perspective. They also emphasize the importance of continuity between clinicians and patients to build trust and foster timely diagnosis. Taken together with recommendations for enhanced communication between specialist and generalist clinicians and more judicious use of diagnostic testing, this report is a comprehensive approach to reducing overdiagnosis and overtreatment.

The World Health Organization International Classification for Patient Safety enables measurement of safety incident severity. In this study, researchers describe how they adapted the system to primary care. Their harm severity classification emphasizes psychological harm, hospitalizations, near misses, and uncertain outcomes in addition to traditional markers of harm.

When patients and caregivers report adverse events, they may identify unique issues that other reporting systems do not capture. The authors propose adjustments to AHRQ's Common Formats for safety event reporting that allow patients and caregivers to more effectively report adverse events. An Annual Perspective emphasized the value of patient adverse event reporting in larger efforts to engage patients in their safety.

Detecting adverse events in the health care setting remains an ongoing challenge. Engaging patients and their family members may help to escalate safety issues not identified by other means. In this mixed-methods study, investigators analyzed the types of issues patients and their care partners reported in real time through a web-based electronic application implemented on three hospital units. After implementation of the tool, event reporting by patients to the Patient Family Relations Department declined, suggesting that patients preferred to report concerns anonymously through the application. The authors conclude that additional research is needed to understand how these types of applications could be integrated into patient safety programs. A past PSNet perspective highlighted how patient-facing technologies can empower patients.

Improving patient safety in the ambulatory setting is an increasing area of focus. In this study, investigators described the use of a patient safety toolkit across 46 outpatient family practices in England.

Although computerized provider order entry (CPOE) reliably reduces medication errors, clinical decision support has more varied impact on safety outcomes. System complexity, insufficient emphasis on human factors engineering, and alert fatigue limit utility of clinical decision support. This study rigorously examined medication error rates before and after implementation of CPOE with clinical decision support at three hospitals in England. In a sample of 2422 patients, the overall error rate decreased 20%. At one hospital, the error rate did not change because an increase in a specific insulin prescribing error counterbalanced all other error reduction. All three hospitals implemented clinical decision support, but the type, nature, and efficacy varied markedly, even between the two systems implementing the same CPOE. A PSNet perspective synthesized lessons for assessing electronic health record safety as a whole.

Computerized provider order entry and clinical decision support are patient safety strategies with significant implementation challenges. This qualitative study aimed to characterize engagement with these two activities across multiple hospitals in the United Kingdom. Investigators conducted interviews, employed direct observation, and reviewed documents such as implementation plans. Their analysis demonstrated a need for ongoing platform improvement (including bug fixes and local tailoring) and for monitoring how these two strategies are used to provide feedback and ensure optimal use. They conclude that in order to realize the benefits of computerized provider order entry and clinical decision support, hospitals must work with frontline staff over time, not just prior to implementation. In a previous PSNet interview, Dr. Robert Wachter discussed the challenges of implementing health information technology.