TY  - JOUR
A1  - Franklin, BD
A1  - Puaar, S
UR  - http://doi.org/10.1177/1460458219833112
VL  - 26
N2  - Most studies evaluating the impact of electronic prescribing on prescribing safety have used comparatively weak study designs such as uncontrolled before-and-after studies. This study aimed to apply a more robust naturalistic stepped wedge study design to compare the prevalence and types of prescribing errors for electronic prescribing and paper prescribing. Data were collected weekly during a phased electronic prescribing implementation across 20 wards in a large English hospital. We identified 511 (7.8%) erroneous orders in 6523 paper medication orders, and 312 (6.0%) in 5237 electronic prescribing orders. Logistic regression suggested no statistically significant effect of electronic prescribing use or of study week; patient and ward had significant effects. Errors involving incorrect doses and illegible or incomplete orders were less common with electronic prescribing; those involving duplication, omission, incorrect drug and incorrect formulation were more common. Actions are needed to mitigate these error types; future studies should give more consideration to the effects of patient and ward.
EP  - 3162
ID  - discovery10070633
N1  - This version is the author accepted manuscript. For information on re-use, please refer to the publisher?s terms and conditions.
TI  - What is the impact of introducing inpatient electronic prescribing on prescribing errors? A naturalistic stepped wedge study in an English teaching hospital
Y1  - 2020/12//
JF  - Health Informatics Journal
AV  - public
KW  - Electronic prescribing
KW  -  hospitals
KW  -  patient safety
KW  -  prescribing errors
KW  -  stepped wedge study
IS  - 4
SP  - 3152
SN  - 1741-2811
ER  -