Abstract
AIMS: Explore and compare junior doctors' perceptions of their self-efficacy in prescribing, their prescribing errors and the possible causes of those errors. METHODS: A cross-sectional questionnaire study was distributed to foundation doctors throughout Scotland, based on Bandura's Social Cognitive Theory and Human Error Theory (HET). RESULTS: 548 questionnaires were completed (35.0% of the national cohort). F1s estimated a higher daytime error rate (median 6.7 (IQR 2-12.4)) than F2s (4.0 IQR (0-10) (p=0.002)), calculated based on the total number of medicines prescribed. The majority of self-reported errors (250; 49.2%) resulted from unintentional actions. Interruptions and pressure from other staff were commonly cited causes of errors. F1s were more likely to report insufficient prescribing skills as a potential cause of error than F2s (p= 0.002). The prescribers did not believe that the outcomes of their errors were serious. F2s reported higher self-efficacy scores than F1s in most aspects of prescribing (p
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 980-987 |
Number of pages | 8 |
Journal | British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology |
Volume | 76 |
Issue number | 6 |
Early online date | 20 Nov 2013 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | Published - Dec 2013 |
Keywords
- junior doctors
- prescribing errors
- patient safety
- causes
- self-efficacy
- social cognitive theory
- human error theory