This site is intended for health professionals only

At the heart of general practice since 1960

Read the latest issue online

GPs buried under trusts' workload dump

DH to launch crackdown on prescribing errors

GP prescribing could come under scrutiny as part of a Government drive to cut medication errors.

The Department of Health said the scheme was likely to be launched early next year, at the latest, and that it was currently enlisting experts to set out its remit.

Primary care minister Steve Brine MP told delegates at the Royal Pharmaceutical Society Conference yesterday that health secretary Jeremy Hunt was working closely with NHS England chief pharmaceutical officer Keith Ridge on tackling prescribing errors.

This work is likely to focus on:

  • Improving communication and preventing errors when patients move between care settings;
  • How pharmacists can support GPs and care homes; 
  • The impact and uses of e-prescribing; and
  • Errors in seven-day services.

It also said there would be a public-facing programme focused on patients’ understanding of medicines, and a piece of work looking at any problems that may arise in the pathway from prescribing to dispensing and monitoring.

Mr Brine said: 'Studies currently indicate that up to 8% of prescriptions have a mistake in dosage level, course length or medication type –a risk which the WHO identifies as “a leading cause of injury and avoidable harm in health care systems across the world".

'Patient education and safe management of information will be at the heart of our efforts to tackle this serious issue. For example, we will need to improve how we use electronic prescribing, as well as how we transfer information about medicines between care settings, where there is significant scope for errors.

'Fundamental to this process is clinical leadership – and that begins with fostering the debate, inside and outside government – around how we can make these essential improvements to our healthcare system.'

A 2012 GMC analysis of prescription items found roughly one in eight patients was affected by a prescribing or monitoring error and, although only one in 550 errors was found to be severe, prompted changes to GP training.

A more recent audit of 500 practices’ prescribing, published in the BMJ in 2015, found around one in 20 patients received a prescription that should have been avoided as it could worsen their condition or interact with another medication.

GP leaders said at the time that pharmacist-led medication reviews could help boost safety and take pressure off GPs.

Readers' comments (26)

  • Just one issue for me: who is going to set this new "standard"?

    If it lacks grassroots input, and turns into "you can't have this 5d course of steroids because it will worsen your diabetes" then may our gods help us all!

    If it means all prescribers using one computerised record, with a permanent audit trail, then about bl**dy time. I don't enjoy transcribing hospital "suggestions" when the outpatient prescriber is reading from a mess list typed at the point of referral some 3 months earlier. Yes I know consultants work hard and the majority are excellent: do you realise that we sometimes have only a few seconds per decision when it comes to some prescribing, often in early evenings.( I have now changed my routine to avoid this.)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Sorry, should read "meds list".

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • A prescription with 2 interacting drugs is only a 'drug error' if enhanced life expectancy is an undesireable outcome. Look at hypertensive prescriptions: any 2 antihypertensives always interact (to lower the blood pressure) !
    To Cobblers: monthly prescribing would be wonderful - it would reduce workload about 28x Why do we still have to sign a script on paper for every single day of the year for some patients, and every week for others?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Response to Conbblers:
    Repeat Dispensing has been available since 2003 and is available electronically now as well.
    The uptake has been very very poor.
    From where I sit this is one of the great lost opportunities of the last 20 years.
    Interestingly where CCG have strategy of investing in pharmacists in primary care, eRD progress across their CCG is looking very good indeed.
    Worth adding to the planning discussions at local level.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • To me, 'removing medication errors' starts with having a decent system, with minimal copying (=minimal transcription errors).

    We need a national medication database for each patient, from which everyone works, whether in hospital, primary care, private medicine, community, OPD, wards... so there is an immediate understanding of what the patient is taking. (A single database doesn't mean a single software program to run it, BTW).

    Then we need a total absence of silly rules ('you can't put CDs on repeat dispensing' -- which I suspect was why Repeat dispensing never took off that well at the beginning).

    Then we need prescriptions which are written to cover clinical needs, not financial ones. All that faffing around to repeat prescriptions every month for longterm medication such as levothyroxine is simple wasting time and increasing the possibility of transcription and transmission errors (electronic and physical).

    Finally, we need time to make the decisions: and it's got to be unhurried and not pressurised. Tired, overwhelmed staff will make mistakes: it's not their fault as much as the system which creates that tiredness and that sense of being overwhelmed.

    ... and ONLY at that point should anyone start to investigate the competencies of the prescribers themselves (though will all the above in place, I suspect that the level of mistakes would already have dropped precipitously.)

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • @Herbert: Misinterpretation- JH 'seems to be' a champion of patient interests. in reality, all he has done to destroy Primary Care and desecrate the profession only shows his true colours. He's a fiend not a friend and his sweet talk and conjured figures are a manipulation to which it is easy to succumb to. He does remain Public enemy number 1 as far as NHS is concerned unless there is a conviction that privatization through the backdoor is in the interest of patients.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Herbert
    Do you truly, honestly think that Jeremy Hunt is a champion of patient safety?
    can we be provided with some supporting Evidence other than the guff he spews out of his own mouth?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 2012 data. Since then we've had introduced: electronic prescribing (with integral alerts), Scriptswitch, Practice Pharmacist, and CCG Prescribing Management Team oversight.

    Firstly, I doubt the 2012 figure is correct.

    Secondly, with Jeremy Hunt failing to act on Francis's main findings and stifling NICE's work on safe clinical staffing ratios; ignoring staffing, funding and beds crises of his making; and hiding the damage that 2012 and subsequent reforms are doing to patients - I hardly think, 'Herbert', that he can be framed as a champion for patient safety.

    BTW, I am forced by prescribing software to choose "medication error" option when cancelling an issue of any drug on patients' medication list...which may cast some doubt on the quality of information that is being thrown at us.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • the best way to reduce error is to give us time to think about what we are doing. If I have an unhurried surgery usually I don"t need to prescribe anything anyway.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • AlanAlmond

    Medication reviews are part of QOF and I see multiple patients every day who come in soley for this reason. To be honest I don't find the increasingly frequent pharmacist medication reviews at all helpful, they rarely throw up much of clinical significance and mainly just duplicate work the GP is already doing and worry patients about side effects they weren't aware they had. The biggest source of medication error in General Practice arrises in the interface between hospital and primary care. I am forever being asked to prescribe stuff supposedly initiated in hospital with no correspondence to back it up...or having non prescribers in hospital telling patients to get me to prescribe something on their advice...or having specialist nurses from rheumatology or the IBD clinic expecting me to prescribe amber drugs with very little hand over and no shared care agreement. This problem is getting more and more frequent with the theme in all being ..that the GP (as the plonker who signs the prescription) carries the can, and the hospital (who ironically have crown indemnity) conveniently not responsible.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 results per page20 results per page50 results per page

Have your say