JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Vigoda, M. M. Articles by Lubarsky, D. A. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Vigoda, M. M. Articles by Lubarsky, D. A. Related Collections Patient Safety Anesthesia Practice Pharmacology Economics and Health Care Research

---

ECONOMICS, EDUCATION, AND POLICY

Discrepancies in Medication Entries Between Anesthetic and Pharmacy Records Using Electronic Databases

From the Center for Informatics and Perioperative Management, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Pain Management, Miller School of Medicine, University of Miami, Miami, Florida.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Michael M. Vigoda, MD, MBA, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Pain Management, University of Miami/Jackson Memorial Hospital, 1611 NW 12th Ave. (C-300), Miami, FL 33136. Address e-mail to Mvigoda{at}med.miami.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Accurate recording of disposition of controlled substances is required by regulatory agencies. Linking anesthesia information management systems (AIMS) with medication dispensing systems may facilitate automated reconciliation of medication discrepancies.

METHODS: In this retrospective investigation at a large academic hospital, we reviewed 11,603 cases (spanning an 8-mo period) comparing records of medications (i.e., narcotics, benzodiazepines, ketamine, and thiopental) recorded as removed from our automated medication dispensing system with medications recorded as administered in our AIMS.

RESULTS: In 15% of cases, we found discrepancies between dispensed versus administered medications. Discrepancies occurred in both the AIMS (8% cases) and the medication dispensing system (10% cases). Although there were many different types of user errors, nearly 75% of them resulted from either an error in the amount of drug waste documented in the medication dispensing system (35%); or an error in documenting the medication in the AIMS (40%).

CONCLUSIONS: A significant percentage of cases contained data entry errors in both the automated dispensing and AIMS. This error rate limits the current practicality of automating the necessary reconciliation. An electronic interface between an AIMS and a medication dispensing system could alert users of medication entry errors prior to finalizing a case, thus reducing the time (and cost) of reconciling discrepancies.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				R. H. Epstein Database Analysis of Atypical Drug Transactions Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2008; 106(3): 1019 - 1020. [Full Text] [PDF]

				F. Dexter Detecting Diversion of Anesthetic Drugs by Providers Anesth. Analg., October 1, 2007; 105(4): 897 - 898. [Full Text] [PDF]

Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999