Developing consensus on hospital prescribing indicators of potential harms amenable to decision support

Aim: To develop a list of prescribing indicators specific for the hospital setting that would facilitate the prospective collection of high severity and/or high frequency prescribing errors, which are also amenable to electronic clinical decision support (CDS). Method: A three-stage consensus technique (electronic Delphi) was carried out with 20 expert pharmacists and physicians across England. Participants were asked to score prescribing errors using a 5-point Likert scale for their likelihood of occurrence and the severity of the most likely outcome. These were combined to produce risk scores, from which median scores were calculated for each indicator across the participants in the study. The degree of consensus between the participants was defined as the proportion that gave a risk score in the same category as the median. Indicators were included if a consensus of 80% or more was achieved. Results: A total of 80 prescribing errors were identified by consensus as being high or extreme risk. The most common drug classes named within the indicators were antibiotics (n=13), antidepressants (n=8), nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (n=6), and opioid analgesics (n=6).The most frequent error type identified as high or extreme risk were those classified as clinical contraindications (n=29/80). Conclusion: 80 high risk prescribing errors in the hospital setting have been identified by an expert panel. These indicators can serve as the basis for a standardised, validated tool for the collection of data in both paperbased and electronic prescribing processes, as well as to assess the impact of electronic decision support implementation or development.

Antidepressant treatment and emotional processing: can we dissociate the roles of serotonin and noradrenaline?

The ability to match individual patients to tailored treatments has the potential to greatly improve outcomes for individuals suffering from major depression. In particular, while the vast majority of antidepressant treatments affect either serotonin or noradrenaline or a combination of these two neurotransmitters, it is not known whether there are particular patients or symptom profiles which respond preferentially to the potentiation of serotonin over noradrenaline or vice versa. Experimental medicine models suggest that the primary mode of action of these treatments may be to remediate negative biases in emotional processing. Such models may provide a useful framework for interrogating the specific actions of antidepressants. Here, we therefore review evidence from studies examining the effects of drugs which potentiate serotonin, noradrenaline or a combination of both neurotransmitters on emotional processing. These results suggest that antidepressants targeting serotonin and noradrenaline may have some specific actions on emotion and reward processing which could be used to improve tailoring of treatment or to understand the effects of dual-reuptake inhibition. Specifically, serotonin may be particularly important in alleviating distress symptoms, while noradrenaline may be especially relevant to anhedonia. The data reviewed here also suggest that noradrenergic-based treatments may have earlier effects on emotional memory that those which affect serotonin.