4.5 Article

Examining variations in prescribing safety in UK general practice: cross sectional study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

期刊

BMJ-BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL
卷 351, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

BMJ PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.h5501

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institute for Health Research through the Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (NIHR GM PSTRC) [GMPSTRC-2012-1]
  2. MRC [MR/K006665/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  3. Medical Research Council [MC_PC_13042, MR/K006665/1] Funding Source: researchfish
  4. National Institute for Health Research [SPCR-042] Funding Source: researchfish
  5. National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR) [gmpstrc-2012-1] Funding Source: National Institutes of Health Research (NIHR)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

STUDY QUESTION What is the prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom, and what is the variation between practices? METHODS A cross sectional study included all adult patients potentially at risk of a prescribing or monitoring error defined by a combination of diagnoses and prescriptions in 526 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) up to 1 April 2013. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of potentially hazardous prescriptions of anticoagulants, anti-platelets, NSAIDs, beta blockers, glitazones, metformin, digoxin, antipsychotics, combined hormonal contraceptives, and oestrogens and monitoring by blood test less frequently than recommended for patients with repeated prescriptions of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and loop diuretics, amiodarone, methotrexate, lithium, or warfarin. STUDY ANSWER and limitations 49 927 of 949 552 patients at risk triggered at least one prescribing indicator (5.26%, 95% confidence interval 5.21% to 5.30%) and 21 501 of 182 721 (11.8%, 11.6% to 11.9%) triggered at least one monitoring indicator. The prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing ranged from almost zero to 10.2%, and for inadequate monitoring ranged from 10.4% to 41.9%. Older patients and those prescribed multiple repeat medications had significantly higher risks of triggering a prescribing indicator whereas younger patients with fewer repeat prescriptions had significantly higher risk of triggering a monitoring indicator. There was high variation between practices for some indicators. Though prescribing safety indicators describe prescribing patterns that can increase the risk of harm to the patient and should generally be avoided, there will always be exceptions where the indicator is clinically justified. Furthermore there is the possibility that some information is not captured by CPRD for some practices-for example, INR results in patients receiving warfarin. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS The high prevalence for certain indicators emphasises existing prescribing risks and the need for their appropriate consideration within primary care, particularly for older patients and those taking multiple medications. The high variation between practices indicates potential for improvement through targeted practice level intervention.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据