Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
BMJ 2004;328:1566 (26 June), doi:10.1136/bmj.328.7455.1566
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
EDITORWe concur with Ferner in his review of computer aided prescribing.1 Our centre's experience of e-prescribing started in 1996 as part of the overhaul of the clinical management system. Voluntary reporting of prescribing errors was the only mechanism before the introduction of the computer system and was certainly an ineffective way of notification. From our own experience, the prescribing error rate went from an average of 10 per year in 1994 to over 100 per year in 1997, indicating previous underreporting. With proper electronic documentation and monthly clinical audits, we have seen the prescribing error rate reduced to 40 last year (a drop of 60%).
|
|
Credit: BSIP ESTIOT/SPL
|
As Farrar et al say in their rapid response (previous letter), we believe that the reduced error rate was due partly to improvement in the legibility and completeness of prescriptions, as well as to the increased awareness of the prescriber
Kenneth Wong, resident
kkywong@hkucc.hku.hk
Paul Tam, chair professor
Division of Paediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Hong Kong Medical Centre, Queen Mary Hospital, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong SAR, China