Support tools for paediatric inpatient prescribers:a review

Prescribing support for paediatrics is diverse and includes both standard texts and electronic tools. Evidence concerning who should be supported and by what method is limited. This review aims to collate the current information available on prescribing support in paediatrics. Many tools designed to support prescribers are technology based. For example, electronic prescribing and smart phone applications. There is a focus on prescriber education both at undergraduate and postgraduate level. In the UK, the majority of inpatient prescribing is done by junior medical staff. It is important to ensure they are competent on qualification and supported in this role. A UK national prescribing assessment is being trialled to test for competence on graduation and there are also tools available to test paediatric prescribing after qualification. No information is available on the tools and resources UK prescribers currently use to support their decision making. One US study reported a decrease in the availability of paediatric prescribing information in a popular reference text. There is limited evidence to show that decisionsupport tools improve patient outcomes, however, there is growing confirmation that electronic prescribing reduces medication errors. There have been reports of new error types, such as selection errors, occurring with the use of electronic prescribing. Another concern with computerised decision-support systems is deciding what alerts should be presented to the prescriber and when/how often in order to avoid alert fatigue. There is little published concerning paediatric alerts perhaps as a consequence of commercial systems often not including paediatric specific support.

Support for paediatric prescribers:what is discussed at hospital board level?

Prescribing support tools range from traditional printed texts to state-of-the-art computerised decision support systems. Comparison between available literature is difficult due to country-specific resources often being the focus of the research. In the UK, it is widely accepted that hospitals take their own individualised approaches to reducing prescribing errors. Objective - This study focused on specialist paediatric hospitals. It aimed to identify the localised approaches taken by paediatric hospitals to reduce prescribing errors. Method - Applied thematic analysis was used to explore the publically published board meeting minutes from the four specialist stand-alone paediatric hospitals in England. Three years of data was collected from each hospital. Codes were collected into groups to identify themes from the data. Results - The main themes identified were clinician involvement in prescribing support is important; credit card-sized reminder tools are used to provide prescribing guidance; electronic prescribing is considered important for reducing prescribing errors; feedback from clinical pharmacists on prescribing errors is widely used; junior doctors require extra support when prescribing; medical records may be incomplete and specific prescribing support (eg, antibiotic prescribing support) is widely in use. Conclusions - There is no single collaborative approach taken to paediatric prescribing support in English paediatric hospitals. Success of electronic prescribing in English paediatric hospitals is considerably behind leaders such as the USA. Use of clinical pharmacists to support prescribers is important as supported by previous studies in Spain and the USA.

Perceptions and experiences of the implementation, management, use and optimisation of electronic prescribing systems in hospital settings:protocol for a systematic review of qualitative studies

Introduction: There is increasing evidence that electronic prescribing (ePrescribing) or computerised provider/physician order entry (CPOE) systems can improve the quality and safety of healthcare services. However, it has also become clear that their implementation is not straightforward and may create unintended or undesired consequences once in use. In this context, qualitative approaches have been particularly useful and their interpretative synthesis could make an important and timely contribution to the field. This review will aim to identify, appraise and synthesise qualitative studies on ePrescribing/CPOE in hospital settings, with or without clinical decision support. Methods and analysis: Data sources will include the following bibliographic databases: MEDLINE, MEDLINE In Process, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Social Policy and Practice via Ovid, CINAHL via EBSCO, The Cochrane Library (CDSR, DARE and CENTRAL databases), Nursing and Allied Health Sources, Applied Social Sciences Index and Abstracts via ProQuest and SCOPUS. In addition, other sources will be searched for ongoing studies (ClinicalTrials.gov) and grey literature: Healthcare Management Information Consortium, Conference Proceedings Citation Index (Web of Science) and Sociological abstracts. Studies will be independently screened for eligibility by 2 reviewers. Qualitative studies, either standalone or in the context of mixed-methods designs, reporting the perspectives of any actors involved in the implementation, management and use of ePrescribing/CPOE systems in hospital-based care settings will be included. Data extraction will be conducted by 2 reviewers using a piloted form. Quality appraisal will be based on criteria from the Critical Appraisal Skills Programme checklist and Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research. Studies will not be excluded based on quality assessment. A postsynthesis sensitivity analysis will be undertaken. Data analysis will follow the thematic synthesis method. Ethics and dissemination: The study does not require ethical approval as primary data will not be collected. The results of the study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant conferences.