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 -