Examining variations in prescribing safety in UK general practice: cross sectional study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink

Study question What is the prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing in general practice in the United Kingdom, and what is the variation between practices? Methods A cross sectional study included all adult patients potentially at risk of a prescribing or monitoring error defined by a combination of diagnoses and prescriptions in 526 general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) up to 1 April 2013. Primary outcomes were the prevalence of potentially hazardous prescriptions of anticoagulants, anti-platelets, NSAIDs, β blockers, glitazones, metformin, digoxin, antipsychotics, combined hormonal contraceptives, and oestrogens and monitoring by blood test less frequently than recommended for patients with repeated prescriptions of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors and loop diuretics, amiodarone, methotrexate, lithium, or warfarin. Study answer and limitations 49 927 of 949 552 patients at risk triggered at least one prescribing indicator (5.26%, 95% confidence interval 5.21% to 5.30%) and 21 501 of 182 721 (11.8%, 11.6% to 11.9%) triggered at least one monitoring indicator. The prevalence of different types of potentially hazardous prescribing ranged from almost zero to 10.2%, and for inadequate monitoring ranged from 10.4% to 41.9%. Older patients and those prescribed multiple repeat medications had significantly higher risks of triggering a prescribing indicator whereas younger patients with fewer repeat prescriptions had significantly higher risk of triggering a monitoring indicator. There was high variation between practices for some indicators. Though prescribing safety indicators describe prescribing patterns that can increase the risk of harm to the patient and should generally be avoided, there will always be exceptions where the indicator is clinically justified. Furthermore there is the possibility that some information is not captured by CPRD for some practices—for example, INR results in patients receiving warfarin. What this study adds The high prevalence for certain indicators emphasises existing prescribing risks and the need for their appropriate consideration within primary care, particularly for older patients and those taking multiple medications. The high variation between practices indicates potential for improvement through targeted practice level intervention. Funding, competing interests, data sharing National Institute for Health Research through the Greater Manchester Primary Care Patient Safety Translational Research Centre (grant No GMPSTRC-2012-1). Data from CPRD cannot be shared because of licensing restrictions.

[1]  J. Valderas,et al.  Withdrawing performance indicators: retrospective analysis of general practice performance under UK Quality and Outcomes Framework , 2014, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[2]  C. Mulvaney,et al.  Development of prescribing-safety indicators for GPs using the RAND Appropriateness Method. , 2011, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[3]  S. Rodgers,et al.  Indicators for preventable drug related morbidity: application in primary care , 2004, Quality and Safety in Health Care.

[4]  Evangelos Kontopantelis,et al.  Relationship between quality of care and choice of clinical computing system: retrospective analysis of family practice performance under the UK's quality and outcomes framework , 2013, BMJ Open.

[5]  A. Sheikh,et al.  A pharmacist-led information technology intervention for medication errors (PINCER): a multicentre, cluster randomised, controlled trial and cost-effectiveness analysis , 2012, The Lancet.

[6]  A. Avery,et al.  Identification of an updated set of prescribing--safety indicators for GPs. , 2014, The British journal of general practice : the journal of the Royal College of General Practitioners.

[7]  Bruce Guthrie,et al.  High risk prescribing in primary care patients particularly vulnerable to adverse drug events: cross sectional population database analysis in Scottish general practice , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[8]  S. Campbell,et al.  Prescribing indicators for UK general practice: Delphi consultation study , 2000, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[9]  D. Reeves,et al.  ClinicalCodes: An Online Clinical Codes Repository to Improve the Validity and Reproducibility of Research Using Electronic Medical Records , 2014, PloS one.

[10]  P. Donnan,et al.  A cluster randomised stepped wedge trial to evaluate the effectiveness of a multifaceted information technology-based intervention in reducing high-risk prescribing of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and antiplatelets in primary medical care: The DQIP study protocol , 2012, Implementation Science.

[11]  Richard D Riley,et al.  Interpretation of random effects meta-analyses , 2011, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[12]  C. Poole,et al.  Preventable Drug-Related Hospital Admissions , 2002, The Annals of pharmacotherapy.

[13]  B. Franklin,et al.  Investigating the prevalence and causes of prescribing errors in general practice : the PRACtICe Study , 2012 .

[14]  K. Bhaskaran,et al.  Completeness and usability of ethnicity data in UK-based primary care and hospital databases , 2013, Journal of public health.

[15]  A. Avery,et al.  Investigating relationships between a range of potential indicators of general practice prescribing: an observational study , 1998, Journal of clinical pharmacy and therapeutics.

[16]  B. Guthrie,et al.  Quality and safety of medication use in primary care: consensus validation of a new set of explicit medication assessment criteria and prioritisation of topics for improvement , 2012, BMC clinical pharmacology.

[17]  Evangelos Kontopantelis,et al.  Primary Care Medication Safety Surveillance with Integrated Primary and Secondary Care Electronic Health Records: A Cross-Sectional Study , 2015, Drug Safety.

[18]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Which drugs cause preventable admissions to hospital? A systematic review. , 2007, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[19]  M. Pirmohamed,et al.  Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients , 2004, BMJ : British Medical Journal.