International Journal of Clinical Pharmacy

, Volume 33, Issue 2, pp 260–263 | Cite as

Analysis of the quality of prescriptions at a cardiovascular ward in Brazil: a pilot study

  • J. S. Siqueira
  • A. R. Antoniolli
  • C. C. Silvestre
  • A. D. Oliveira-Filho
  • W. B. Silva
  • D. P. LyraJr.Email author
Research Article


Aim of study To analyze the quality of prescriptions in a hospital in Brazil. Methods A cross-sectional pilot study of the quality of prescriptions of adult patients admitted at the cardiovascular ward. Data were collected with the help of a structured form developed by the researchers based on related literature, with items about medications and completeness of prescriptions. The form was divided into four categories of prescription quality indicators: prescription type, legibility and readability of handwriting, and completeness. Main outcome measures 100 patients participated in the study, with ages between 20 and 94 years (mean of 67.12 ± 16.6 years), We analyzed 5,030 on 496 prescriptions for 100 patients. Of 11% the handwriting was considered to be less legible and 17% considered illegible. In terms of readability, a high incidence of medications were prescribed by their brand names (89%), and 13,707 abbreviations (mean of 27.6 per prescription) were used mainly to refer to the route of administration (31%), concentration (27%), and indications for use (20%). In relation to completeness, 471 (95%) prescriptions were considered incomplete, mainly medication data. Conclusion The quality indicators used in this study revealed a high rate of prescription problems and errors.


Hospital Medication errors Patient safety Prescribing errors Brazil 




Conflicts of interests



  1. 1.
    Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To err is human. Building a safer health system. Washington: National Academy Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Rosa MB, Perini E, Anacleto TA, Neiva HM, Bogutchi T. Errors in hospital prescriptions of high-alert medications. Rev Saúde Pública. 2009;43:490–8. doi: 10.1590/S0034-89102009005000028.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ashworth M, LEA R, Gray H, Gravelle H, Majeed A. The development of prescribing incentive schemes in primary care: a longitudinal survey. B J Gen Pract. 2003;53:468–70.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Ross S, Bond C, Rothnie H, Thomas S, Macleod MJ. What is the scale of prescribing errors committed by junior doctors? A systematic review. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2009;67:629–40. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2008.03330.x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Velo GP, Minuz P. Medication errors: prescribing faults and prescription errors. Br J Clin Pharmacol 2009;67:624–628: doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2125.2009.03425.x.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    World Health Organization. Good practice in prescribing medicines—guidance for doctors. Genebra: Pan American Health Organization; 2001.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Grégoire JP, Moisan J, Potvin L, Chabot I, Verreault R, Milot A. Effect of drug utilization reviews on the quality of in-hospital prescribing: a quasi-experimental study. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:33–44. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-6-33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Holbrook AM, Pareira JA, Labiris R, McDonald H, Douketis JD, Crowther M, Wells PS. Systematic overview of warfarin and its drug and food interactions. Arch Intern Med. 2005;165:1095–106.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Goldberg RM, Mabee J, Chan L, Wong S. Drug-drug and drug-disease interactions in the emergency department: analysis of a high-risk population. Am J Emerg Med. 1996;14:447–50. doi: 10.1016/S0735-6757(96)90147-3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kennedy AG, Senders JW, Sellen K, Callas PW, Carney JK. Perception of drug-name legibility by pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. Am J Health-Syst Pharm. 2009;66:794–5. doi: 10.2146/ajhp080189.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Garbutt J, Milligan PE, McNaughton C, Highstein G, Waterman BM, Dunagan WC, Fraser VJ. Reducing medication prescribing errors in a teaching hospital. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008;34:528–36.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vaida AJ, Peterson J. Incomplete directions can lead to dispensing errors. Pharm Times. 2002;5:34–8.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hussain S. Safer prescribing: the principles. Found Years; 4:246–248 2008: doi: 10.1016/j.mpfou.2008.06.010.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Barker KN, Flynn EA, Pepper GA, Bates DW, Mikeal RL. Medication errors observed in 36 health care facilities. Arch Intern Med. 2002;162:1897–903.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cohen MR. Alphabet Soup: hazardous to your health! ISMP Teleconference: Meeting the 2005 National Patient Safety Goals. Institute for Safe Medication Practices. 2005.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Koczmara C, Jelincic V, Dueck C. Dangerous abbreviations: “U” can make a difference!. Dynam. 2005;16:11–5.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • J. S. Siqueira
    • 1
  • A. R. Antoniolli
    • 1
  • C. C. Silvestre
    • 1
  • A. D. Oliveira-Filho
    • 1
  • W. B. Silva
    • 1
  • D. P. LyraJr.
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Laboratory of Teaching and Research in Social PharmacyFederal University of Sergipe, (DFS/UFS), LEPFS-UFSAracajuBrazil

Personalised recommendations