Skip to content

ANTICHOLINERGIC MEDICATION IN HOSPITALIZED PATIENTS

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

SILVIA CORNEJO-UIXEDA, M JOSE MARTINEZ-PASCUAL

Why was it done?

The anticholinergic burden is the cumulative effect of concomitantly taking multiple drugs with anticholinergic properties. It estimates the risk of suffering anticholinergic adverse effects. Anticholinergic scales are lists that rank the anticholinergic potential of drugs into categories.

What was done?

Our aim is to know the use of drugs with anticholinergic effect (ACD) in a regional hospital.

How was it done?

Observational study in patients older than 70 years admitted to a regional hospital from January to September 2021. We reviewed the medication of the patients looking for ACD. Then, we calculated anticholinergic burden with the “Drug Burden Index” available in: http://www.anticholinergicscales.es/calculate. The variables collected were: age, gender, number of drugs with anticholinergic effect, if ACD were prescribed before hospitalization, readmission, anticholinergic burden, risk of suffering anticholinergic effect and anticholinergic symptoms.

What has been achieved?

average 81 years (70-100), 102 (56% woman), 46 (25%) did not have any ACD. 58 patients had 1 ACD, 56 patients 2 ACD, 12 patients 3 ACD, 8 patients 4 ACD, 2 patients 5 ACD. Of patients with ACD, anticholinergic burden average was 0.98 in surgical patients (medium risk) and 1 in medical patients (elevated risk). 68 patients had medium risk and 68 patients elevated risk. We found constipation in 17 patients, somnolence in 6 patients, and disorientation in 2 patients. ACD used were the following (surgical vs. medical patients): Antidepressants: 3 vs.10, benzodiazepines: 28 vs. 33, opioids: 17 vs. 27, antiemetics: 13 3 vs. 38, Antipsychotics: 4 3 vs. 49, antihistamines: 2 vs. 2, antiepileptic: 0 vs 9, other: 0 vs. 3.
56 patients (31%) were prescribed the same ACD that they took before hospitalization. Only 17 patients were readmitted in hospital in less than a month.
We just made 2 interventions. We proposed to lower the dose in one case. In another, we proposed give metoclopramide just if necessary.

What next?

Most of hospitalized patients have ACD prescribed. Half of them had a high risk. However, just a few had anticholinergic reactions. This could be explained because we only had the information of electronic history and maybe some of them were not collected.

Deprescribing interventions performed by hospital pharmacists reduce potentially inappropriate medication at hospital discharge

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Alba Martin Val, Adrià Vilariño Seijas, Arantxa Arias Martínez, Anna Terricabras Mas, Andrea Bocos Baela , Maite Bosch Peligero, Carles Quiñones Ribas

Why was it done?

In CCPs the efficacy and safety of many drugs are unknown or questionable, in fact, medication may be the cause for side effects. Deprescribing is aimed to reduce the use of potentially inappropriate medications (PIMs) and improve patient outcomes. Pharmacist deprescribing interventions may contribute to reassess prescriptions and withdraw those with a negative risk/benefit balance.

What was done?

To analyze the pharmacist deprescribing interventions in complex chronic patients (CCPs) performed in hospital and primary care.

How was it done?

This prospective study was carried out in a tertiary hospital between February and March 2021. CCPs whom medication was reconciliated at hospital discharge were included and the pharmacist interventions (PIs) performed were analyzed. After hospital discharge, the acceptance of the PIs was verified and were notified to the primary care physician in case of not being accepted in hospital setting. Drugs involved in PIs were classified according to the therapeutic group established by the Anatomical Therapeutic Chemical classification and high-risk medication was quantified using the Institute for Safe Medication Practices classification for chronic patients. Deprescribing interventions were classified according to the Less-Chron criteria and other medication-related problems were also quantified.

What has been achieved?

Among the 55 patients included, 55% were female, the mean age was 83 years and the mean of medication per patient was 13. A total of 111 PIs were performed, 44% (n = 49) were deprescribing interventions and 56% (n = 63) other problems related to medication. Fifty-five per cent of patients presented 1 or more PIMs, and a mean of approximately 1 PIMs per patient was reported. The most frequent therapeutic groups involved in PIs were cardiovascular system (34.2%), nervous system (29.7%) and alimentary tract and metabolism medication (13.5%). High-risk medication represented 41% of all PIs. The most frequent deprescribing interventions were associated to blood pressure treatment (30.6%), benzodiazepines (24.4%) and statins (12%). The 65% of deprescribing interventions were accepted among hospital and primary care settings.

What next?

Deprescribing interventions supported by hospital pharmacists reduce potentially inappropriate medications, however, deprescribing practice is still limited in hospital and primary care.

THE APPLICATION OF AN EHEALTH MODEL IN THE HEALTH CARE SYSTEM

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Clinical Pharmacy Services

Author(s)

MAR GOMIS-PASTOR, ANNA DE DIOS LÓPEZ, MARIA ANTONIA MANGUES, MIRIAM ORS, MERITXELL CUCALA, CATERINA SANPOL, VICTOR ROBERT, XAVIER BORRAS, GEMMA CRAYWINCKEL

Why was it done?

HTP are therapeutically complex patients who may benefit from an intensive telematic follow-up. Moreover, human relations among patients and health providers may be enhanced to improve patients’ empowerment with their health care. Additionally, interdisciplinary eHealth projects lead to increased interaction among health providers, expanding advanced patient-centered care in healthcare systems.

What was done?

An eHealth program directed to heart transplant patients (HTP) was implemented. The software developed was called mHeart and consists on a mobile phone application complemented by a website(https://n9.cl/ajut). A pilot study to validate the software and a clinical trial were conducted. This tool is now extended into clinical practice.

How was it done?

This project and its potential scalability has achieved the creation of a well-established framework involving among relevant others the Legal Department, the Information Systems Department, the patient data protection supervisor, and the Innovation Research Institute.
The success and the scalability of these innovative projects in our centre depended on health providers’ engagement with eHealth, new interoperability solutions, adequate institutional support, and government reimbursement models.

What has been achieved?

The clinical trial conducted in 134HTP has demonstrated to improve recipients’ adherence to immunosuppressants (85% mHeart follow-up vs 46% conventional follow-up)[OR=6.7 (2.9;15.8),P-value=.000], to improve patients’ experience of therapeutic regimens and to reduce in-clinic facilities because the mHeart follow-up. (65% mHeart follow-up vs 35% conventional follow-up)[OR=3.4 (1.7;6.9),P-value=.001].

What next?

This eHealth experience has allowed continuing creating evidence on the use of the eHealth in other populations: an onco-hematological platform, EMMA(Ehealth Medical self-Management Aid), has been designed including diverse profiles depending on the clinical specifications (e.g. multiple myeloma or bone marrow transplant conditions); MyPlan has been adapted to perform an interdisciplinary follow-up of any multimorbid population with polypharmacy. Thus, the system can be used in any multimorbid patients by activating or omitting certain modules that define the target patients’ specific comorbidities (e.g. glycemia module or blood pressure module).
The new EMMA and MyPlan will be clinically tested in diverse trials in 2020 including several health care interdisciplinary teams, including the emergency setting, onco-hematology, migraine, dyslipidemia and cardiovascular risk, among relevant others. In addition, other Spanish centers are implementing the eHealth model and the software in their Institutions assisted by the experience gathered.

REVIEW OF THE HOSPITAL HIGH-ALERT MEDICATIONS LIST USING HOSPITAL AND INTERNATIONAL DATA (submitted in 2019)

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Božena Bürmen

Why was it done?

In University Medical Centre Ljubljana (UMCL) a HAM list was created in 2008 and has not been significantly changed since then. Our aim was to develop a systematic strategy to review the list by including local data.

What was done?

We comprehensively updated the hospital list of high-alert medications (HAM) and identified hospital specific medications not yet present on HAM lists. We joined international HAM data supported by medication error (ME) reports and expert opinion with data from the hospital ME reporting system.

How was it done?

We analysed 390 MEs submitted to the UMCL ME reporting system from 2016 to 2018. We compared the HAM list from Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) and the UMCL HAM list. The criteria such as frequency of the reported ME, severity of harm for the patient, affected population, novelty, etc, were used to identify potential HAM. Furthermore, we calculated the probability of the ME report for the individual medications from the reported MEs and the hospital medication consumption data. The calculation was done for the medications involved in 3 or more reported MEs (Tyynismaa et al, 2017) and for the medications involved in MEs which caused harm to the patient.

What has been achieved?

The joined results from the comparison of HAM lists and reported MEs showed that several other medications could be added to the UMCL HAM list, e.g. individualised parenteral nutrition for the paediatric population, oral sedation agents for children, dialysis solutions, lidocaine IV, methadone, bupivacaine, and nusinersen. The probability-based HAM identifying method supported our previous suggestions to extend the UMCL HAM list. Additionally, the method unexpectedly revealed medications with a high probability of ME and/or harm for the patients, that are not included in any HAM list (ISMP, UMCL), such as romiplostim, parenteral iron preparations, ampicillin with sulbactam, and others.

What next?

In future we plan to develop a paediatric specific HAM list based on the same strategy; i.e. considering international suggestions and analysing paediatric ME reports in UMCL.

THE ACTIVITIES AND IMPACT OF A HOSPITAL-WIDE MEDICATION INITIATIVE (submitted in 2019)

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Alice Oborne, Mark Kinirons, Virginia Aguado, Steve Wanklyn, Laura Watson, Jaymi Mistry, Duncan McRobbie, Abhiti Gulati, Emma Ritchie, David Wood, Niall Stewart-Kelcher, Adrian Hopper, Patricia Snell, Tony West

Why was it done?

Medicines are common interventions but have inherent dangers: 9% inpatient prescriptions contain errors, and medication errors occur at an estimated rate of one per patient per day [1-3]. Medication incident reporting was low, with high proportions of harmful incidents.

What was done?

Senior and junior staff collaborated to systematically improve safe medication processes and outcomes in a 1200-bedded multi-site hospital. The work aimed to reduce harm from medicines and improve medication safety culture.

How was it done?

Pharmacists, doctors, nurses and governance staff set up a Medication Safety Forum which met monthly to focus on high risk drugs, processes and patients. Published literature and international guidance were reviewed [1-3]. Twelve subgroups worked on safer opioid, insulin, anticoagulant, allergy and injectable medicine use and paediatric, elderly, critical care and peri-operative care. Subgroups published guidelines on the hospital intranet. External aviation and patient safety experts reviewed processes. Medication incident data were reported to staff monthly from June 2008. A monthly medication safety newsletter (total 68), screensaver messages, podcasts, mouse-mats, ‘safety days’, audit, training and senior staff promoted best practice. Electronic prescribing and medication administration (EPMA) with decision support was introduced in 2015.

What has been achieved?

The Medication Safety Forum met monthly 2009−2019. Medication incident reporting increased from 60 to over 400 per month (total 31330 over 11 years), whilst harmful incidents all reduced (Figure). Incidents with harm reduced from 51 to 24 in the first to last 20 months. Dose omissions reduced by 10% despite an increase in patient acuity, anticoagulant use and insulin use. The most common incident type was wrong dose, agreeing with national incident data. New guidelines included 30 for insulin, 28 anticoagulation and 19 opioid use. Medication incident reporting increased from 10th to highest in similar hospitals [3].

 

What next?

Multidisciplinary leadership, multimedia guidance, technology, audit and feedback in medication safety can be applied in any healthcare setting to enhance patient safety. Further system enhancements are planned.

References:
[1]National Patient Safety Agency 2004. Seven steps to patient safety
[2]Prescribing report, 2010. www.rcpLondon.ac.uk
[3]NHS Improvement organisational data reports

STANDARDISATION OF DILUTED POTASSIUM INTRAVENOUS SOLUTIONS IN NEONATAL CARE UNITS (submitted in 2019)

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Luis Pérez de Amezaga Tomás, María Magdalena Parera Pascual, Mónica Sanz Muñoz, Catalina March Frontera, Gonzalo González Morcillo, Alejandra Mandilego Garcia, Álvaro Medina Guerrero, Ana Filgueira Posse, Montserrat Vilanova Boltó

Why was it done?

Administration of intravenous KCl produces hyperkalaemia and this can result in cardiac arrest and death. The Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP) as well as other security agencies have recommended the withdrawal of KCl 2M from ward stock. This project was born as a response to these recommendations. We focused on a group of patients where these practices have not been extensively implemented. The aim of the protocol was to standardise the prescription, preparation, dispensation and administration of KCl to neonates in our hospital.

What was done?

Development of a protocol that standardises diluted potassium intravenous solutions for neonates (including those preterm over 28 weeks of gestation). This allowed us to remove concentrated potassium chloride (KCl) 2M from neonatal care units in our hospital. For this purpose, the hospital pharmacy centralised the preparation and distribution of KCl ready-to-use infusions.

How was it done?

The elaboration of the protocol took place as follows: • A multidisciplinary team designed KCl ready-to-use solutions that met the requirements of the newborn: – Glucose 10% 250mL with 5 mEq KCl (20mEq/L solution) – Glucose 10% 250mL with 10 mEq KCl (40mEq/L solution). • The hospital pharmacy centralised the preparation of these solutions. A risk assessment was performed and determined an expiration date of 7 days. • These solutions were stocked at all neonatal care units: Intensive Care Unit, Hospitalized Paediatric Unit and Paediatric Emergency Unit. • Weekly, the hospital pharmacy distributes these solutions and disposes of the expired ones. • Only ready-to-use KCl solutions were able to prescribe at the electronic prescription programme. • A formation plan was implemented to train all the professionals involved in neonatal care.

What has been achieved?

The protocol was implemented in November 2016. Since then, 65 patients have been treated with 20mEq/L solution and only 1 patient with 40mEq/L solution. No remarkable imbalances in electrolytes have been detected resulting from the standardisation of the fluid therapy with KCl. Only 3 incidents have been registered. All of them were prescription errors (solution selection); they reached the patient but without damage.

What next?

Nowadays, we are developing a stability study of the KCl solutions in order to assess the appropriateness of the expiration date.

MULTIDISCIPLINARY CAR-T TEAM (submitted in 2019)

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Clinical Pharmacy Services

Author(s)

MARGHERITA GALASSI, CHIARA DELLA COSTANZA , CLAUDIA TIRONE, SARA BERTOLI, ERNESTO RUFFINO, ELEONORA FERRARI, ELENA ALIPRANDI , VITO LADISA

Why was it done?

CAR-T cell therapies are a new advanced type of personalised immunotherapy against cancer. In the EU the authorised therapies are tisagenlecleucel and axicabtagene ciloleucel, both used in our centre as third line for the registered indication of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma. CAR-T therapies production and administration process consists of multiple stages: patient’s leukapheresis, genetic engineering of lymphocytes, lymphodepleting chemotherapy (LC), CAR-T cell infusion, monitoring of the patient. Considering the complexity of the procedure and the observance of specific schedules, these therapies should be administered in highly specialised centres complying with specific organisational requirements, with disposal of an adequate multidisciplinary team.

What was done?

A multidisciplinary team (CAR-T team) was constituted for the management of CAR-T therapies (Chimeric Antigen Receptor T). The pharmacist was included in the team for the planning and organisational phase of the process.

How was it done?

The pharmacist is responsible for the approval of the physician’s prescription, the LC preparation according to Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP), the LC distribution on scheduled time, the making available of treatments for supporting the patient until CAR-T infusion, and treatments after infusion for management of adverse events. At the arrival of the CAR-T product, the pharmacist is responsible for the check and release of it in good condition. The LC protocols foresee the administration of cyclophosphamide and fludarabine on the 5th, 4th and 3rd day before the CAR-T infusion, and are defined on the basis of the summary-of-product characteristics. The medications are provided locally and refunded by the national health system.

What has been achieved?

In our center 8 patients were treated with compassionate use of axicabtagene ciloleucel. The pharmacist’s presence in the multidisciplinary team was advantageous because, through validation of the therapies and verification of dosages, they guarantee further security to the patients. The high-tech automated centralisation and computerisation of chemotherapies at our centre ensured quality and safety of the preparations.

What next?

The realisation of defined paths and codified proceedings, the respect of fundamental timings for the success of the process and the chemotherapy preparation centralisation could lead to increased investment, decisive for obtaining a high quality product and process level. The experience, now limited to haematology, could be used for future CAR-T applications.

A QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ON HEPARIN INFUSION SAFETY IN AN ACUTE TEACHING HOSPITAL (submitted in 2019)

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Anthony Hackett, Alice Oborne, Emma Ritchie, Caroline Broadbent, Rebecca Chanda, Karen Breen

Why was it done?

Anticoagulants such as UFH are recognised as high risk drugs. UFH requires frequent monitoring of the activated partial thromboplastic time ratio (APTTr), ensuring therapeutic anticoagulation and minimising adverse effects. UFH infusions and the APTTr were recorded using a paper based system. Incident reporting identified by the paper system resulted in inappropriate monitoring and management of UFH infusions, and dose omissions which could have resulted in harm.

What was done?

A Trust-wide electronic prescribing and medicines administration (EPMA) system was implemented in 2015. Complex infusions, e.g. unfractionated heparin (UFH) infusions, remained on paper due to EPMA functionality limitations. The complex infusion function was added into later EPMA upgrades. A multidisciplinary team (MDT) involving nursing, medical and pharmacy staff working within anticoagulation, EPMA and medication safety sought to design UFH infusions in EPMA.

How was it done?

Baseline audit (Paper-March 2016): Patients prescribed UFH infusions (n=14) were identified using SharePoint (e-reporting) by searching for the UFH infusion placeholder. Performance was measured against eight audit standards.
Re-audit (EPMA-March 2019): Patients prescribed UFH infusions (n=26) were identified using SharePoint by searching for those prescribed a UFH infusion on EPMA. Performance was measured against the same eight audit standards.
Chi square applied to results to test for statistical significance.
Incident rate per prescription: The Datix system was searched to identify heparin incidents reported during the data collection periods.

What has been achieved?

Audit standard 2016 audit v 2019 audit
1-Baseline APTTr checked before starting infusion 93% v 100%, p=0.1
2-Received correct loading dose of heparin based on APTTr 79% v 96%, p=0.07
3-APTTr checked 6 hours after infusion started 72% v 100%, p<0.05
4-APTTr checked 6 hours after infusion titrations 86% v 96%, p=0.2
5-APTTr in target range within 24 hours 50% v 70%, p=0.2
6-APTTr checked 24 hourly after 2 consecutive APTTr’s in range 100% v 100%=no change
7-Patient receives a medical review 24 hrly 65% v 100%, p<0.05
8-Heparin syringe and giving set changed 24 hrly 65% v 100%, p<0.05

UFH related incidents reduced from one incident per 1.6 infusions, to one incident per 6.5 infusions following the implementation of an EPMA system.
UFH incidents as a proportion of all anticoagulant incidents reduced from 43% (March-2016) to 20% (March-2019).

What next?

Electronic solution’s for high-risk, complex infusions such as heparin prescribing and monitoring improved care, quality and safety. Further high-risk infusions such as insulin are being developed

IMPLEMENTATION OF A MEDICATION SAFETY AGENDA AT TWO HOSPITAL SITES IN RESPONSE TO WORLD HEALTH ORGANISATION (WHO) PATIENT SAFETY CHALLENGE ‘MEDICATION WITHOUT HARM’ (submitted in 2019)

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Meenal Patel, Sheena Patel, Peta Longstaff

Why was it done?

• Initiative introduced and on-going since 2017
• To increase and embed medication safety awareness
• To address under-reporting of medication-related incidents, with feedback
• To embed medication safety in education programmes and clinical practice

What was done?

A local medication safety agenda implemented across two hospital sites in response to World Health Organisation (WHO) patient safety challenge ‘Medication without Harm’.

How was it done?

• Medication safety group (MSG) introduced with local strategy, involving junior medical staff for frontline feedback • Medication safety metrics changed to allow benchmarking with peers as per NHS Improvement’s Model Hospital data • ‘Plan, Do, Study, Act’ model applied to improve transfer of care from hospital to rehabilitation unit following external incidents • Monthly analysis of incidents with harm, exploring reasons for under-reporting • Optimisation of incident reporting system to improve staff feedback following investigations • Near miss error log introduced in pharmacy with shared learning • Mitigation of medication-related risks e.g. medications safe storage action plan • Medication safety bulletins, patient safety newsletters and top tips guide introduced covering focal themes • ‘Safe prescribing’ mandatory induction training for junior doctors to support prescribing of high risk medicines and compliance to patient safety alerts • Hospital-wide education on lessons learnt from incidents • Medication safety resources for staff to access • Nursing quality round on medication safety • Electronic missed doses realtime report developed to tackle omitted/delayed critical medication doses • Medication safety awareness (MSA) week held to increase awareness on focal themes

What has been achieved?

• Multidisciplinary MSG with assurance on meeting WHO global challenge. • Monthly analysis of medication safety data to allow learning, collaboration and benchmarking against peers. • Positive staff feedback on bulletins/newsletters with staff involvement/engagement. • Training programmes embedded with safe prescribing education. • Improved hospital safety metrics: Following MSA week, a 5% and 21% increase in medication-related incident reporting occurred at each site which has been sustained. Reporting rates doubled at one site following success of MSA week. • In 2018-19, local target achieved for reported medication-related incidents per 100,000 finished consultant episodes and medication-related incidents with harm

What next?

• Collaborative multidisciplinary working raising the profile of pharmacists acting as medication safety officers
• Implementing medication safety measures from NHS Patient Safety Strategy 2019
• Initiatives for safer culture, safer systems and safer patients

IMPLEMENTING THE PRODUCTION OF STERILISED SYRINGES IN THE HOSPITAL: IMPROVING MEDICATION SAFETY AND SAVING HEALTHCARE COSTS

Pdf

PDF Icon

European Statement

Patient Safety and Quality Assurance

Author(s)

Karin Larmene-Beld, Rommert Wijnsma, Gerrit de Weerd, Maarten Postma, Erik Frijlink, Katja Taxis

Why was it done?

Medication administration errors are common in hospital practice. Meta-analyses suggest that about 10% of administrations are erroneous, with much higher error rates occurring during intravenous drug administrations. It has been demonstrated that 21% of the errors can be eliminated when prepared syringes are used. Many countries struggle with the problem of optimising the process of safe parenteral medication in hospitals. Different guidelines across countries outline how preparation of parenteral medication in the clinical environment should be done. Recently the Council of Europe published a resolution about preparation of medication which encourage the supply of ready-to-administer products by the pharmacy. Moving the activities of preparation of medication from the clinical environment to the pharmacy requires investments in pharmacy equipment but will result in efficacy, better quality and reduction in preparation medication errors in the hospital.

What was done?

Development and implementation of sterilisable plastic syringes produced in the hospital pharmacy for large-scale production of ready-to-administer products.

How was it done?

A new development in this area are ready-to-administer pre-filled sterilised syringes (PFSS) produced by the pharmacy. PFSS are produced on stock under GMP conditions by the hospital pharmacy using (semi) automatic filling and closing machines whereby quality and safety are embedded in the whole process of manufacturing. A total cost of ownership analysis is performed showing PFSS prepared in the hospital pharmacy yielded cost savings compared to conventional preparation on the ward. The process of production, filling, closing and sterilisation has been validated using newly acquired equipment. With the introduction of the cyclic olefin polymer (COP) syringes a new type of primary container is implemented in the pharmacy. To ensure patient safety and product quality a science- and risk-based strategy has been developed for testing extractables and leachables to qualify the new container as primary packaging material.

What has been achieved?

Introducing PFSS is cost saving for the healthcare system:– COP syringes are suitable as primary packaging material; –enhancement styles for better readability of labels are established; and – already, 15 products are validated and available for use in the hospital.

1. KHM Larmené-Beld KHM, Touwen-Spronk J, Luttjeboer J, et al. A cost minimization analysis of ready-to-administer pre-filled sterilized syringes in a Dutch hospital.. Submitted for publication in Clinical Therapeutics.
2. Larmené-Beld K, Kuiper A, van Berkel S, et al. A science- and risk-based strategy to qualify sterilized prefilled syringes as primary packaging material in a hospital pharmacy. Abstract submitted for 24th EAHP Congress.
3. Larmené-Beld KHM, Kim Alting E, Taxis K. A systematic literature review on strategies to avoid look-alike errors of labels. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 2018 74:985–93.

What next?

Introducing more drugs as ready-to-administer products. Optimising the label of ready-to-administer syringes to avoid look-alike errors based on the results of the review.

×

Join us in Prague for

the 2nd edition of BOOST!

Secure your spot (limited seats available!)

BOOST is where visionaries, innovators, and healthcare leaders come together to tackle one of the biggest challenges in hospital pharmacy — the shortage of medicine and medical devices.

×

Deadline extended to July 15th

Problems caused by shortages are serious, threaten patient care and require urgent action.

Help us provide an overview of the scale of the problem, as well as insights into the impact on overall patient care.

Our aim is to investigate the causes of medicine and medical device shortages in the hospital setting,  while also gathering effective solutions and best practices implemented at local, regional, and national levels.

×

Join us in Prague for the 2nd edition of BOOST!

Secure your spot in the Movement for Shortage-Free World

BOOST is where visionaries, innovators, and healthcare leaders come together to tackle one of the biggest challenges in hospital pharmacy—medicine shortages.