HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Submit a response Alert me when this article is cited Alert me when eLetters are posted Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Forrey, R. A. Articles by Schneider, P. J. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Forrey, R. A. Articles by Schneider, P. J.

RYAN A. FORREY, PHARM.D., M.S., is Assistant Director, Department of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University Medical Center (OSUMC), Columbus; at the time of the study he was a Resident in Pharmacy Practice Management at OSUMC and a graduate student in health-system pharmacy administration at The Ohio State University (OSU), Columbus. CRAIG A. PEDERSEN, PH.D., FAPHA, is Associate Professor and Director of Graduate Studies, Division of Pharmacy Practice and Administration, College of Pharmacy; and PHILIP J. SCHNEIDER, M.S., FASHP, is Clinical Professor and Director, Latiolais Leadership Program, College of Pharmacy, OSU.

Address correspondence to Dr. Pedersen at the College of Pharmacy, The Ohio State University, 500 West 12th Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210-1291 (pedersen.18{at}osu.edu).

Purpose. The interrater agreement for and reliability of the National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention (NCC MERP) index for categorizing medication errors were determined. Methods. A letter was sent by the U.S. Pharmacopeia to all 550 contacts in the MEDMARX system user database. Participants were asked to categorize 27 medication scenarios using the NCC MERP index and were randomly assigned to one of three tools (the index alone, a paper-based algorithm, or a computer-based algorithm) to assist in categorization. Because the NCC MERP index accounts for harm and cost, and because categories could be interpreted as substantially similar, study results were analyzed after the nine error categories were collapsed to six. The interrater agreement was measured using Cohen’s kappa value. Results. Of 119 positive responses, 101 completed surveys were returned for a response rate of 85%. There were no significant differences in baseline demographics among the three groups. The overall interrater agreement for the participants, regardless of group assignment, was substantial at 0.61 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.41–0.81). There was no difference among the kappa values of the three study groups and the tools used to aid in medication error classification. When the index was condensed from nine categories to six, the interrater agreement increased with a kappa value of 0.74 (95% CI, 0.56–0.90). Conclusion. Overall interrater agreement for the NCC MERP index for categorizing medication errors was substantial. The tool provided to assist with categorization did not influence overall categorization. Further refining of the scale could improve the usefulness and validity of medication error categorization. Index terms: Classification; Data collection; Errors, medication; Methodology; National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention; Reports

 

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. D. Williams and D. M. Ashcroft Medication errors: how reliable are the severity ratings reported to the national reporting and learning system? Int. J. Qual. Health Care, October 1, 2009; 21(5): 316 - 320. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. C. Alexander, D. G. Bundy, A. D. Shore, L. Morlock, R. W. Hicks, and M. R. Miller Cardiovascular Medication Errors in Children Pediatrics, July 1, 2009; 124(1): 324 - 332. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				J. P. Santell, J. G. Kowiatek, R. J. Weber, R. W. Hicks, and C. A. Sirio Medication errors resulting from computer entry by nonprescribers Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., May 1, 2009; 66(9): 843 - 853. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]