Objectives: Clinical decision making can be influenced by academic detailing, and it was hypothesised that this technique may be used to reduce simple errors when prescribing drugs of addiction. These prescriptions require specific details to be included, otherwise the prescription has to be returned to the prescriber and re-written, wasting the time of the dispenser and prescriber alike.
Methods: The legal requirements for the prescription of addictive drugs were used to define prescription errors. Prescription error rates at six hospitals were assessed, including a control and an intervention hospital where academic detailing was carried out. Prescription error rates were documented before and after an academic detailing visit to junior doctors, including the provision of a bookmark containing the requirements for these drugs. These errors were expressed as a percentage of the total written for a 4-week period.
Results: At the intervention hospital, there was a significant decrease in error rate (from 41% to 24%, P<0.0001) with an improvement in all the requirements stated on the bookmark. At this hospital, the confidence of the junior doctors on a self-rating 5-point scale in writing prescriptions for these drugs increased from a mean of 3.25 (95% CI 2.92-3.58) to 4.14 (95%CI 3.90-4.38) after the intervention (P=0.03). The baseline error rates at the other hospitals ranged from 25% to 46%, but the control hospital did not show a significant change in error rate over the same study period ( P=0.66). A post-hoc review suggested that liquid preparations were more difficult to prescribe correctly, which in part accounted for the differences in error rate between hospitals.
Conclusions: Academic detailing appears to be a useful method of reducing erroneous hospital prescriptions; and, to our knowledge, this is a novel finding.