Search

The aim of this study was to determine the proportion of near-miss dispensing errors in hospital pharmacies in Japan. A prospective multi-center observational study was conducted between December 2018 and March 2019. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of near-miss dispensing errors in hospital pharmacy departments. The secondary objective was to determine the predictive factors for near-miss dispensing errors using multiple logistic regression analysis. The study was approved by the ethical committee at The Institute of Medical Sciences, University of Tokyo, Japan. A multi-center prospective observational study was conducted in 20 hospitals comprising 8862 beds. Across the 20 hospitals, we assessed data from 553 pharmacists and 53039 prescriptions. A near-miss dispensing error proportion of 0.87% (n = 461) was observed in the study. We found predictive factors for dispensing errors in day-time shifts: a higher number of drugs in a prescription, higher number of quantified drugs, such as liquid or powder formula, in a prescription, and higher number of topical agents in a prescription; but we did not observe for career experience level for clinical pharmacists. For night-time and weekend shifts, we observed a negative correlation of near-miss dispensing errors with clinical pharmacist experience level. We found an overall incidence of near-miss dispensing errors of 0.87%. Predictive factors for errors in night-time and weekend shifts was inexperienced pharmacists. We recommended that pharmacy managers should consider education or improved work flow to avoid near-miss dispensing errors by younger pharmacists, especially those working night or weekend shifts.

Antimicrobial use during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic at a tertiary-care center was analyzed using interrupted time-series analysis. Among intravenous antimicrobials, the use of azithromycin and third-generation cephalosporins significantly decreased during the current pandemic. Similarly, the use of oral antimicrobials, including azithromycin and fluoroquinolones, also decreased.

Handheld blood glucose (BG) meters are convenient tools that are widely used to measure the BG levels. However, the hematocrit (Hct) value has been identified as a confounding factor for accurate BG measurement. Some BG meters are equipped with an Hct-correcting feature, whose effectiveness has been tested previously. Nevertheless, the measurements yielded by many BG meters are confounded by the Hct values. Recently, a new BG meter equipped with an Hct-correcting feature has been developed; however, its effectiveness has not yet been confirmed.Venous blood samples were collected from two healthy volunteers, and the Hct values in the samples were adjusted to approximately 0%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60%. Further, venous blood samples were collected from 10 anemic patients (Hct40%). The whole BG (WBG) levels in the samples were measured using two devices-the new BG meter (Glutest Neo Super [Sanwa Kagaku Kenkyusho Co. Ltd., Nagoya, Japan]) and a standard BG meter (OneTouch Ultra [Life Scan Inc., Milpitas, CA]). For reference, plasma glucose (PG) levels were measured using a machine at our hospital laboratory (GA08 [AT Co., Kanagawa, Japan]). The bias in the measurements was calculated as follows: bias = ([WBG - PG]/PG) x 100. Further, the correlation between the Hct values and the bias was assessed by performing linear regression analysis.In both the Hct-adjusted samples and the samples obtained from anemic patients, the WBG levels measured using Glutest Neo Super were minimally affected by the Hct values, while those measured using OneTouch Ultra were affected by the Hct values to a statistically significant extent.The Hct-correcting feature of the new BG meter Glutest Neo Super was effective. The use of this new device for BG measurements may lead to more appropriate treatment selection.

Insulin injection pens have been primarily developed for self-injection among individuals with diabetes. However, an increased elderly population with diabetes has caused an increase in the number of patients who cannot self-inject insulin. Consequently, caregivers inject insulin to the patients ("other-injection"); however, insulin injection devices have not yet been developed for other-injection use.We evaluated five devices-OptiClik (Sanofi-aventis, Paris, France), SoloStar (Sanofi-aventis), MirioPen without an antiskid tool (Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, IN), MirioPen with an antiskid tool (Eli Lilly, Hyogo, Japan), and FlexPen (Novo Nordisk A/S, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). In all, 22 respondents (mean +/- SD age, 42.6 +/- 9.3 years [range, 26-57 years]), including 11 men (50.0%) and 11 women (50.0%), injected themselves (self-injection) and others (other-injection). Thereafter, respondents evaluated the ease of use and feel of the pen devices via questionnaires. As a result, we evaluated 220 procedures of insulin injections [22 (respondents) x 5 (devices) x 2 (self and other)] in this study.FlexPen was selected as the best device for self-injection but as the worst device for other-injection. OptiClik was selected as the second worst device for self-injection but as the best device for other-injection. Moreover, for other-injection, FlexPen was too long and less stable, had poor dial visibility, was difficult to recap, and was comprehensively inferior.We identified problems that were not apparent during studies evaluating conventional self-injection. We conclude that devices meant for other-injection should have different features from those designed for self-injection and that consideration of caregivers' viewpoints is necessary for developing an insulin device specifically meant for other-injection.