Study of Factors Affecting Medical Incident: 1. Dispensing

Yuka Miyachi, Chika Nakayama, Kazuyo Nagashiba, K. Kinoshita, Masayuki Takeuchi, Masafumi Ohnishi, Hiroko Saito, Taeyuki Oshima
{"title":"Study of Factors Affecting Medical Incident: 1. Dispensing","authors":"Yuka Miyachi, Chika Nakayama, Kazuyo Nagashiba, K. Kinoshita, Masayuki Takeuchi, Masafumi Ohnishi, Hiroko Saito, Taeyuki Oshima","doi":"10.4236/PP.2018.912041","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, medical institutions have taken a \nvariety of measures to prevent medical incident. In addition, progress has been \nmade toward the development of a fully automated system for the purpose of \nmedicine dispensing. However, automating the dispensing, or having it replaced \nby artificial intelligence (AI) will not, eradicate human error. Thus, measures \nagainst human error will continue to serve as an important topic. Therefore, \nhospitals are required to improve the efficiency of the pharmacy department. \nFor these purposes, attention has now shifted to Supply Processing and \nDistribution (SPD). In this study, we measured for the gaze of the pharmacist \nand SPD, and examined the factors affecting dispensing error; moreover, we \nexamined prevention of the human error. In the results of the eye tracking, SPD \nmembers tended to spend a greater number of gaze time and gaze counts, for each \nmedicine, on “medicines” and “picking lists,” than pharmacists. On the other \nhand, when pharmacists picking medicines, they performed various work \noperations in parallel, such as checking the prescription and looking the next \nshelf location. It was conjectured that SPD members had more clearly defined \nitems to check when picking, compared to pharmacists. This may have possibly \nled to a lower chance of dispensing errors being introduced by SPD members. \nThese results suggest that the process of selection is not a mandatory \nrequirement of pharmacists during the action of dispensing. Instead, SPD \nmembers, pharmacy assistants, or automatic dispensing devices could serve as \nsubstitutes for picking. It is suggested that pharmacists should spend more \ntime and effort on prescription inspection, medicines checking and dosing \noperations.","PeriodicalId":19875,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacology & Pharmacy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-12-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacology & Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4236/PP.2018.912041","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

In recent years, medical institutions have taken a variety of measures to prevent medical incident. In addition, progress has been made toward the development of a fully automated system for the purpose of medicine dispensing. However, automating the dispensing, or having it replaced by artificial intelligence (AI) will not, eradicate human error. Thus, measures against human error will continue to serve as an important topic. Therefore, hospitals are required to improve the efficiency of the pharmacy department. For these purposes, attention has now shifted to Supply Processing and Distribution (SPD). In this study, we measured for the gaze of the pharmacist and SPD, and examined the factors affecting dispensing error; moreover, we examined prevention of the human error. In the results of the eye tracking, SPD members tended to spend a greater number of gaze time and gaze counts, for each medicine, on “medicines” and “picking lists,” than pharmacists. On the other hand, when pharmacists picking medicines, they performed various work operations in parallel, such as checking the prescription and looking the next shelf location. It was conjectured that SPD members had more clearly defined items to check when picking, compared to pharmacists. This may have possibly led to a lower chance of dispensing errors being introduced by SPD members. These results suggest that the process of selection is not a mandatory requirement of pharmacists during the action of dispensing. Instead, SPD members, pharmacy assistants, or automatic dispensing devices could serve as substitutes for picking. It is suggested that pharmacists should spend more time and effort on prescription inspection, medicines checking and dosing operations.
医疗事故影响因素研究:调剂
近年来,医疗机构采取了多种措施来预防医疗事故。此外,为药品调剂目的的全自动系统的开发也取得了进展。然而,自动化点胶或用人工智能(AI)取代它并不能消除人为错误。因此,防止人为错误的措施将继续是一个重要的话题。因此,要求医院提高药剂科的工作效率。出于这些目的,注意力现在已经转移到供应加工和分销(SPD)。在本研究中,我们测量了药剂师的凝视和SPD,并检查了影响配药误差的因素;此外,我们还研究了人为错误的预防。在眼动追踪的结果中,SPD成员倾向于花更多的凝视时间和凝视次数,对于每种药物,在“药物”和“挑选清单”上比药剂师花更多的时间和次数。另一方面,当药剂师挑选药物时,他们同时进行各种工作操作,例如检查处方和查看下一个货架位置。据推测,与药剂师相比,SPD成员在挑选时有更明确的检查项目。这可能导致SPD成员引入分配错误的可能性较低。这些结果表明,在调剂过程中,选择过程并不是药剂师的强制性要求。相反,SPD成员、药房助理或自动配药设备可以作为采摘的替代品。建议药师在处方审核、验药和给药操作等方面投入更多的时间和精力。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信