Relevance of Foreign Alerts and Newsletters for the Medication Errors Reporting Programme in The Netherlands: An Explorative Retrospective Study

Ka Chun Cheung; Patricia M L A van den Bemt; Marcel L. Bouvy; Michel Wensing; Peter A G M De Smet

doi:10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9

Relevance of Foreign Alerts and Newsletters for the Medication Errors Reporting Programme in The Netherlands: An Explorative Retrospective Study

Ka Chun Cheung^*, Patricia M L A van den Bemt, Marcel L. Bouvy, Michel Wensing, Peter A G M De Smet

^*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

Abstract

Introduction: National reporting programmes usually collect and analyse medication error reports from healthcare providers in their own country and only disseminate guidance to healthcare providers within the borders of their country. It is unclear how much different national programmes could learn from each other. The aim of this study was therefore to explore to what extent alerts and newsletters about medication errors issued in other countries could also be relevant for the Netherlands.

Conclusion: This study showed for a broad range of errors that the Dutch national reporting programme could learn from the three reporting programmes in Canada, the US and the UK. National reporting programmes can benefit from sharing alerts and newsletters that enhance the learning between countries.

Methods: Ninety disseminated information items that had been issued by three national programmes (Canada, the US and the UK) in the period from June 2009 until June 2012 were collected. These items were compared with the national reporting programme Central Medication Incidents Registration (CMR-NL) in The Netherlands. Each selected item was subsequently assessed independently with six assessment criteria: is the medicine available in the Netherlands? If so, could a similar error occur in the Netherlands? Did the CMR-NL reporting programme receive any reports about a comparable (or even identical) error? If so, did these reports include any errors with serious temporary or permanent harm? Did the CMR-NL disseminate output about it?; If so, what was the dissemination date of CMR-NL?

Results: From the 90 items, 87.8 % (n = 79) were relevant for Dutch healthcare. For 43 of the 90 items (47.8 %), the CMR-NL had received comparable (or even identical) errors but had not disseminated any alert or newsletter about these errors. The CMR-NL had disseminated an alert or newsletter for 14 of the 90 items (15.6 %).

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	981-987
Number of pages	7
Journal	Drug Safety
Volume	37
Issue number	11
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2014

Access to Document

10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9

Embargoed Document

art%3A10.1007%2Fs40264-014-0229-9
Final published version, 260 KB
Embargo ends: 1/01/50

Cite this

@article{126d79a7f5d3460d9e890a049a9a5b63,

title = "Relevance of Foreign Alerts and Newsletters for the Medication Errors Reporting Programme in The Netherlands: An Explorative Retrospective Study",

abstract = "Introduction: National reporting programmes usually collect and analyse medication error reports from healthcare providers in their own country and only disseminate guidance to healthcare providers within the borders of their country. It is unclear how much different national programmes could learn from each other. The aim of this study was therefore to explore to what extent alerts and newsletters about medication errors issued in other countries could also be relevant for the Netherlands.Conclusion: This study showed for a broad range of errors that the Dutch national reporting programme could learn from the three reporting programmes in Canada, the US and the UK. National reporting programmes can benefit from sharing alerts and newsletters that enhance the learning between countries.Methods: Ninety disseminated information items that had been issued by three national programmes (Canada, the US and the UK) in the period from June 2009 until June 2012 were collected. These items were compared with the national reporting programme Central Medication Incidents Registration (CMR-NL) in The Netherlands. Each selected item was subsequently assessed independently with six assessment criteria: is the medicine available in the Netherlands? If so, could a similar error occur in the Netherlands? Did the CMR-NL reporting programme receive any reports about a comparable (or even identical) error? If so, did these reports include any errors with serious temporary or permanent harm? Did the CMR-NL disseminate output about it?; If so, what was the dissemination date of CMR-NL?Results: From the 90 items, 87.8 % (n = 79) were relevant for Dutch healthcare. For 43 of the 90 items (47.8 %), the CMR-NL had received comparable (or even identical) errors but had not disseminated any alert or newsletter about these errors. The CMR-NL had disseminated an alert or newsletter for 14 of the 90 items (15.6 %).",

author = "Cheung, {Ka Chun} and {van den Bemt}, {Patricia M L A} and Bouvy, {Marcel L.} and Michel Wensing and {De Smet}, {Peter A G M}",

year = "2014",

month = jan,

day = "1",

doi = "10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9",

language = "English",

volume = "37",

pages = "981--987",

journal = "Drug Safety",

issn = "0114-5916",

publisher = "Springer",

number = "11",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Relevance of Foreign Alerts and Newsletters for the Medication Errors Reporting Programme in The Netherlands

T2 - An Explorative Retrospective Study

AU - Cheung, Ka Chun

AU - van den Bemt, Patricia M L A

AU - Bouvy, Marcel L.

AU - Wensing, Michel

AU - De Smet, Peter A G M

PY - 2014/1/1

Y1 - 2014/1/1

N2 - Introduction: National reporting programmes usually collect and analyse medication error reports from healthcare providers in their own country and only disseminate guidance to healthcare providers within the borders of their country. It is unclear how much different national programmes could learn from each other. The aim of this study was therefore to explore to what extent alerts and newsletters about medication errors issued in other countries could also be relevant for the Netherlands.Conclusion: This study showed for a broad range of errors that the Dutch national reporting programme could learn from the three reporting programmes in Canada, the US and the UK. National reporting programmes can benefit from sharing alerts and newsletters that enhance the learning between countries.Methods: Ninety disseminated information items that had been issued by three national programmes (Canada, the US and the UK) in the period from June 2009 until June 2012 were collected. These items were compared with the national reporting programme Central Medication Incidents Registration (CMR-NL) in The Netherlands. Each selected item was subsequently assessed independently with six assessment criteria: is the medicine available in the Netherlands? If so, could a similar error occur in the Netherlands? Did the CMR-NL reporting programme receive any reports about a comparable (or even identical) error? If so, did these reports include any errors with serious temporary or permanent harm? Did the CMR-NL disseminate output about it?; If so, what was the dissemination date of CMR-NL?Results: From the 90 items, 87.8 % (n = 79) were relevant for Dutch healthcare. For 43 of the 90 items (47.8 %), the CMR-NL had received comparable (or even identical) errors but had not disseminated any alert or newsletter about these errors. The CMR-NL had disseminated an alert or newsletter for 14 of the 90 items (15.6 %).

AB - Introduction: National reporting programmes usually collect and analyse medication error reports from healthcare providers in their own country and only disseminate guidance to healthcare providers within the borders of their country. It is unclear how much different national programmes could learn from each other. The aim of this study was therefore to explore to what extent alerts and newsletters about medication errors issued in other countries could also be relevant for the Netherlands.Conclusion: This study showed for a broad range of errors that the Dutch national reporting programme could learn from the three reporting programmes in Canada, the US and the UK. National reporting programmes can benefit from sharing alerts and newsletters that enhance the learning between countries.Methods: Ninety disseminated information items that had been issued by three national programmes (Canada, the US and the UK) in the period from June 2009 until June 2012 were collected. These items were compared with the national reporting programme Central Medication Incidents Registration (CMR-NL) in The Netherlands. Each selected item was subsequently assessed independently with six assessment criteria: is the medicine available in the Netherlands? If so, could a similar error occur in the Netherlands? Did the CMR-NL reporting programme receive any reports about a comparable (or even identical) error? If so, did these reports include any errors with serious temporary or permanent harm? Did the CMR-NL disseminate output about it?; If so, what was the dissemination date of CMR-NL?Results: From the 90 items, 87.8 % (n = 79) were relevant for Dutch healthcare. For 43 of the 90 items (47.8 %), the CMR-NL had received comparable (or even identical) errors but had not disseminated any alert or newsletter about these errors. The CMR-NL had disseminated an alert or newsletter for 14 of the 90 items (15.6 %).

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84911414007&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9

DO - 10.1007/s40264-014-0229-9

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:84911414007

SN - 0114-5916

VL - 37

SP - 981

EP - 987

JO - Drug Safety

JF - Drug Safety

IS - 11

ER -

Relevance of Foreign Alerts and Newsletters for the Medication Errors Reporting Programme in The Netherlands: An Explorative Retrospective Study

Abstract

Access to Document

Embargoed Document

Fingerprint

Cite this