Safety and efficiency of a new generic package labelling: a before and after study in a simulated setting

Background Medication errors are frequent and may cause harm to patients and increase healthcare expenses. Aim To explore whether a new labelling influences time and errors when preparing medications in accordance with medication charts in an experimental setting. Method We carried out an uncontrolled before and after study with 3 months inbetween experiments. Phase I used original labelling and phase II used new generic labelling. We set up an experimental medicine room, simulating a real-life setting. Twenty-five nurses and ten pharmacy technicians participated in the study. We asked them to prepare medications in accordance with medication charts, place packages on a desk and document the package prepared. We timed the operation. Participants were asked to prepare medications in accordance with as many charts as possible within 30 min. Results Nurses prepared significantly more medication charts with the generic labelling compared with the original 3.3 versus 2.6 (p=0.009). Mean time per medication chart was significantly lower with the generic labelling 6.9 min/chart versus 8.5 min/chart (p<0.001). Pharmacy technicians were significantly faster than the nurses in both phase I (6.8 min/chart vs 9.5 min/chart; p<0.001) and phase II (6.1 min/chart vs 7.2 min/chart; p=0.013). The number of errors was low and not significantly different between the two labellings, with errors affecting 9.1% of charts in phase I versus 6.5% in phase II (p=0.5). Conclusions A new labelling of medication packages with prominent placement of the active substance(s) and strength(s) in the front of the medication package may reduce time for nurses when preparing medications, without increasing medication errors.

[1]  M Eccles,et al.  Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for evaluating guideline implementation strategies. , 2000, Family practice.

[2]  Tor Endestad,et al.  Package Design Affects Accuracy Recognition for Medications , 2016, Hum. Factors.

[3]  C. Whittlesea,et al.  Incorrect drug selection at the point of dispensing: a study of potential predisposing factors , 2011, The International journal of pharmacy practice.

[4]  E. Etchells,et al.  Frequency, type and clinical importance of medication history errors at admission to hospital: a systematic review , 2005, Canadian Medical Association Journal.

[5]  Matthew F. Niedner,et al.  A Systematic Approach to Improving Medication Safety in a Pediatric Intensive Care Unit , 2012, Critical care nursing quarterly.

[6]  Giovanni Panti Generic substitutions , 2005, J. Symb. Log..

[7]  M. Hassali,et al.  The experiences of implementing generic medicine policy in eight countries: A review and recommendations for a successful promotion of generic medicine use , 2013, Saudi pharmaceutical journal : SPJ : the official publication of the Saudi Pharmaceutical Society.

[8]  D. Hughes,et al.  Generic and therapeutic substitutions in the UK: are they a good thing? , 2010, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[9]  Adrienne Berman,et al.  Reducing Medication Errors Through Naming, Labeling, and Packaging , 2004, Journal of Medical Systems.

[10]  E. Snell Generic substitution , 1983, British medical journal.

[11]  Kathryn A Phillips,et al.  Potential Savings from Substituting Generic Drugs for Brand-Name Drugs: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 19972000 , 2005, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[12]  E. Toverud,et al.  Generic substitution: additional challenge for adherence in hypertensive patients? , 2009, Current medical research and opinion.

[13]  J. Posner,et al.  Generic substitution. , 2011, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[14]  A. Seger,et al.  Potential Savings From Substituting Generic Drugs for Brand-Name Drugs: Medical Expenditure Panel Survey, 1997–2000 , 2005 .