Search

Background: Cancer treatments have gradually evolved into targeted molecular therapies characterized by a unique mechanism of action instead of non-specific cytotoxic chemotherapies. However, they have unique safety concerns. For instance, endocrinopathies, which are defined as unfavorable metabolic alterations including thyroid disorders, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, and adrenal insufficiency necessitate additional monitoring. The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of monitoring errors and develop strategies for monitoring cancer patients who receive targeted therapies., Method: A retrospective chart review was used to assess the prevalence of monitoring errors of endocrinopathies among cancer patients who received targeted therapies over one year. All of the adult cancer patients diagnosed with a solid tumor who received targeted therapies were included. The primary outcome was to determine the prevalence of monitoring errors of endocrinopathies. The secondary outcomes were to assess the incidences of endocrinopathies and referral practice to endocrinology services., Results: A total of 128 adult patients with solid tumors were involved. The primary outcome revealed a total of 148 monitoring errors of endocrinopathies. Monitoring errors of the lipid profile and thyroid functions were the most common error types in 94% and 92.6% of the patients treated with novel targeted therapies, respectively. Subsequently, 57% of the monitoring errors in the blood glucose measures were identified. Targeted therapies caused 63 events of endocrinopathies, hyperglycemia in 32% of the patients, thyroid disorders in 15.6% of them and dyslipidemia in 1.5% of the patients., Conclusion: Our study showed a high prevalence of monitoring errors among the cancer patients who received targeted therapies which led to endocrinopathies. It emphasizes the importance of adhering to monitoring strategies and following up on the appropriate referral process.

Background : Medications errors (MEs) have been a major concern of healthcare systems worldwide. Voluntary-based incident reporting is the mainstay system to detect such events in many institutions. However, the number of reports can be highly variable across institutions depending on their adoption of the safety culture. This study aimed to evaluate and analyze medication error incidents that were submitted through the hospital safety reporting system in 2015 at a tertiary care center in the western region of Saudi Arabia, and to explore the most common types of harmful MEs in addition to the risk factors that led to such harmful incidents. Methods : This is a descriptive study that was conducted utilizing 624 medication error reports extracted from the hospital safety reporting system. Reports were analyzed based on the medication name, event type, event description, nodes of the medication use process, harm score (adapted from the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention harm index), patients' age/gender, incident setting, and time of occurrence as documented in the Safety Reporting System (SRS). Furthermore, all errors that resulted in injury or harm to patients had a deeper review by two senior pharmacists to find contributing factors that led to these harmful incidents and recommend system-based preventive strategies. Results : This study showed that most reported incidents were near misses (69.3%). The pediatric population was involved in 28.4% of the incident reports. Most of the reported incidents were categorized as occurring in the inpatient setting (57.4%). Medication error incidents were more likely to be reported in the morning shift versus evening and night shift (77.4% vs. 22.6%). Most reported incidents involved the dispensing stage (36.7%). High-alert medications were reported in 281 out of 624 events (45%). Conclusions : The hospital medication safety reporting program is a great tool to identify system-based issues in the medication management system. This study identified many opportunities for improvement in the medication use system, especially in management of chemotherapy and anticoagulant agents.

Many hospitals face barriers in the implementation of TDM services, this study aimed to evaluate a pharmacist-led TDM service to optimize patients' outcomes. Adult patients who were administered vancomycin, gentamicin, or amikacin were included. The pre-phase included a retrospective assessment of patients and the intervention phase consisted of an educational program. The post-phase assessed patients based on TDM services provided by inpatient pharmacists on a 24-h, 7-day basis for 3 months. The primary outcome was to assess the mean difference in proportion of correct initial doses of prescribing orders. Secondary outcomes included assessing the mean differences in proportions of correct dose adjustments and correct drug sampling time. Seventy-five patients in each phase were eligible. Patients who received optimal initial dosing in the post-phase showed a higher statistical significance, mean difference of 0.31, [95% CI (0.181⁻0.4438), p < 0.0001]. Patients in the post-phase received more optimal dose adjustments, mean difference of 0.1, [95% CI (-0.560⁻0.260), p = 0.2113]. Drug levels were ordered more correctly in the post-phase, mean difference of 0.03, [95% CI (-0.129⁻0.189), p = 0.7110]. This study demonstrated the important role of TDM services led by pharmacists in optimizing the initial dosing for these antibiotics.

Journal clubs have been traditionally incorporated into academic training programs to enhance competency in the interpretation of literature. We designed a structured journal club (JC) to improve skills in the interpretation of literature; however, we were not aware of how learners (interns, residents, clinical pharmacists, etc.) would perceive it. We aimed to assess the perception of learners at different levels of pharmacy training. A cross-sectional design was used. A self-administered online survey was emailed to JC attendees from 2010-2014 at King Abdulaziz Medical City, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. The survey questions included: introduction sessions, topic selection, JC layout, interaction with the moderator, and decision-making skills by clinical pharmacists. The response rate was 58/89 (65%); 52/54 (96%) respondents believed that JC adds to their knowledge in interpreting literature. Topic selection met the core curriculum requirements for credentials exams for 16/36 (44.4%), while 16/22 (73%) presenters had good to excellent interaction with the moderator. JC facilitated decision-making for 10/12 (83%) of clinical pharmacists. The results suggest that clinical pharmacist-steered JC may serve as an effective tool to empower learners at different levels of pharmacy practice, with evidence-based principles for interpretation of literature and guide informed decision-making.