Israel Medical Association Journal

Background: Medication errors are a common cause of morbidity and mortality.

Objectives: To evaluate the rate of acknowledgment of medication errors as reported by physicians working in the community and in hospitals.

Methods: An anonymous questionnaire was sent to 9320 active physicians (about 48% community physicians, 17% hospital physicians and 35% working in both places), with questions on the rate and type of medication errors that they had encountered during their professional career. The questions specified errors in dosage, type of medicine (wrong indication), route of administration and drug interactions.

Results: Only 627 physicians (6.7%) responded. Of these, nearly 79% admitted having made an error in prescribing medication; the majority admitted to more than one error. Physicians with fewer years of experience admitted having made a mistake more than did physicians with more experience (P = 0.019). Pediatricians and geriatricians made more dosage mistakes (P = 0.02), while family physicians and psychiatrists made more mistakes in drug interactions (P = 0.001).

Conclusions: It is possible that indifference, fear of identification, or lack of awareness may have contributed to the low response rate despite the fact that the questionnaire was anonymous. Educational programs should be implemented in medical schools to encourage physicians to report errors before the onset of adverse reactions.
 

Background: A substantial number of premature deliveries occur in hospitals lacking neonatal intensive care facilities. We previously demonstrated a comparable outcome of very low birth weight infants delivered in a level II nursery to that of inborn infants delivered in our tertiary care center, but a similar comparison of extremely low birth weight infants has not been done.

Objectives: To compare the neonatal outcome (mortality, severe intraventricular hemorrhage/periventricular leukomalacia, bronchopulmonary dysplasia and intact survival) of inborn and outborn ELBW[1] infants, accounting for sociodemographic, obstetric and perinatal variables.

Methods: We compared 97 ELBW infants (birth weight ≤ 1000 g.) delivered between the years 2000 and 2004 in a hospital providing neonatal intensive care to 53 ELBW babies delivered in a referring hospital. A univariate model was first applied to examine the associations of the individual independent variables with the outcome variable, followed by a logistic stepwise regression analysis for each of the outcome variables. The odds ratios for each predictor were reported as well as their P values and 95% confidence intervals.

Results: In the stepwise logistic regression analysis, accounting for a possible confounding effect of the independent variables, ‘hospital of birth’ remained a statistically significant predictor in the final step only for mortality, with odds ratio (inborns relative to outborns) of 3.32 (95%CI[2] 1.19–9.28, P = 0.022). No statistically significant associations with the other outcome variables were found (severe IVH[3]/PVL[4] odds ratio = 1.99, 95%CI = 0.77–5.14, P = 0.155; BPD[5] odds ratio = 0.60, 95%CI = 0.19–1.91, P = 0.384; intact survival OR[6] = 0.56, 95%CI = 0.23–1.35, P = 0.195).