This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Fabiá, A. S. Articles by Jiménez Torres, N V. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Fabiá, A. S. Articles by Jiménez Torres, N V. Pubmed/NCBI databases Medline Plus Health Information Cancer Chemotherapy Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Pharmaceutical validation as a process of improving the quality of antineoplastic treatment

Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain

Elisa Cavero Rodrigo

Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain

Asunción Albert Marí

Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain

Daniel Almenar Cubells

Oncology Unit, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain

N Victor Jiménez Torres

Pharmacy Department, Hospital Universitario Dr. Peset, Valencia, Spain, Departamento de Farmacia y Tecnologia Farmacéutica, Universidad de Valencia, Spain

Objective. To quantify the improvement added by standardization of pharmaceutical validation (PV) of antineoplastic treatment to the processes of prescription and preparation of the pharmacotherapeutic sequence, in terms of prevention and reduction of medication errors (ME).

Design. Prospective cohort study during two years (from 2001-2002) for oncohaematologic patients (inpatients and outpatients) that compared the percentage of medication errors detected and resolved and the number of medication errors with potential clinical significance (severity value 4) intercepted during PV in both years. Results. During the PV processes, 202 ME were identified and resolved, which is the equivalent of 16.88 ME/1000 patient-days. In 2001 14.08 ME/1000 patient-days were detected and 19.83 ME/1000 patient-days in 2002. This means that the effectiveness of the identification method increased by 41%. The number of ME intercepted with clinical significance (severity value 4) increased in a statistically significant manner by 2.18 times in 2002.

Conclusion. This study shows that the standardization of PV is an effective method of improving the quality of antineoplastic treatment use, by increasing the ability to intercept ME.

Key Words: antineoplastic treatment • medication errors • pharmaceutical validation • preparation • prescription • standardization

Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, Vol. 11, No. 2, 45-50 (2005)
DOI: 10.1191/1078155205jp156oa


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?