Oral chemotherapy safety practices at US cancer centres: questionnaire survey

BMJ 2007; 334 doi: 10.1136/bmj.39069.489757.55 (Published 22 February 2007)
Cite this as: BMJ 2007;334:407
  1. Saul N Weingart, vice president for patient safety1,
  2. Jonathan Flug, medical student2,
  3. Daniela Brouillard, administrative assistant1,
  4. Laurinda Morway, research coordinator1,
  5. Ann Partridge, staff physician3,
  6. Sylvia Bartel, pharmacy director3,
  7. Lawrence N Shulman, chief medical officer3,
  8. Maureen Connor, vice president for quality improvement and risk management3
  1. 1Center for Patient Safety, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA 02115, USA
  2. 2Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston
  3. 3Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston
  1. Correspondence to: S N Weingart saul_weingart{at}dfci.harvard.edu
  • Accepted 5 December 2006

Abstract

Objective To characterise current safety practices for the use of oral chemotherapy.

Design Written questionnaire survey of pharmacy directors of cancer centres.

Setting Comprehensive cancer centres in the United States.

Results Respondents from 42 (78%) of 54 eligible centres completed the survey, after consulting with 89 colleagues. Clinicians at 29 centres used handwritten prescriptions, two used preprinted paper prescriptions, and six used electronic systems for most oral chemotherapy prescribing. For six commonly used oral chemotherapies, on average 10 centres required a diagnosis on the prescription, 11 required the protocol number, four required the cycle number, nine required double checking by a second clinician, 14 required a calculation of body surface area, and 14 required a calculation of dose per square metre of body surface area. Only a third of centres requested patients' written informed consent when oral chemotherapy was given off protocol. Nearly a quarter (10) of centres had no formal process for monitoring patients' adherence. In the past year respondents at 10 centres reported at least one serious adverse drug event related to oral chemotherapy, and respondents at 13 centres reported a serious near miss.

Conclusion Few of the safeguards routinely used for infusion chemotherapy have been adopted for oral chemotherapy at US cancer centres. There is currently no consensus at these centres about safe medication practices for oral chemotherapy.

Footnotes

  • We thank the Comprehensive Cancer Center Consortium for Quality Improvement (C4QI) for help in completing this project.

  • Contributors: SNW, JF, AP, SB, LNS, and MC were responsible for conception and design. SNW, JF, DB, LM, and MC collected the data. SNW, AP, LNS, and MC analysed and interpreted data. SNW, JF, DB, LM, AP, SB, LNS, and MC drafted and revised the paper. AP and SNW carried out the statistical analysis. SNW, JF, DB, LM, SB, LNS, and MC were responsible for administrative, technical, and material support. SNW and LNS supervised the study. SNW is guarantor.

  • Funding: Center for Patient Safety, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston. SNW was also supported by a K08 Mentored Clinical Scientist Career Development Award (1 K08 HS 11644) from the US Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

  • Competing interests: None declared.

  • Ethical approval: Dana-Farber Cancer Institute's institutional review board.

  • Accepted 5 December 2006

THIS WEEK'S POLL