Clinical oncology pharmacist: Effective contribution to patient safety. (October 2019)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Duarte, Natalia C; Barbosa, Cristina R; Tavares, Mariane GR; Dias, Lara P; Souza, Rafael N; Moriel, Patricia
• Is Part Of: Journal of oncology pharmacy practice. Volume 25:Number 7(2019)
• Page Start: 1665
• Page End: 1674
• Publication Date: 2019-10
• Subjects: Medication errors -- oncology pharmacist -- patient safety; Cancer -- Chemotherapy -- Periodicals; Clinical pharmacology -- Periodicals; 616.994061
• DOI: 10.1177/1078155218807748
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1078-1552

Abstract

Management and prevention of problems related to oncology drugs are particularly important due to the excessive cost, high toxicity, and narrow therapeutic index of the antineoplastic drugs, in addition to the patients' state of health. Therefore, the presence of the pharmacist as a member of the multidisciplinary team is essential to contribute to patient safety. In this work, the interventions performed were identified, quantified, and classified to characterize the work of the clinical oncology pharmacist. This is a prospective and quantitative study, conducted over a period of six months in the outpatient oncology and chemotherapy clinic of the University Hospital of the University of Campinas, Brazil. A total of 3526 medical prescriptions were evaluated for the 780 patients seen and, among these prescriptions, 220 (6.24%) contained errors, representing 6.24% of the total number. The most common error was dose-related with 79 (22.83%) cases of overdosing. Wrong-patient medication error was the least reported (0.29%). Thirty drugs were involved in the pharmaceutical interventions, Carboplatin and Ondansetron being the most frequent. Thirteen types of potential errors were evaluated according to the method proposed by Cardinal and Fernandes. Two (15.38%) included interventions of indication, contraindication, and therapeutic efficacy of a drug. Five of them (38.46%) are related to the treatment regimen, and two (15.38%) were related to prevention of potential adverse events. Four interventions (30.77%) concerned technical interventions in injectable drugs such as dilution, compatibility, and administration time. Of the 346 interventions performed, 1 (0.29%) was classified as potentially lethal, 114 as serious (32.95%), 140 as significant (40.46%), and 91 as minor (26.30%).