New
Service for TodaysSeniorsNetwork.com
readers...roll mouse over, click on
highlighted links in stories to review items
from Amazon
Now, keep up to date
with daily feeds of newly posted stories
about America's Seniors...click on the box
to the left
Pharmacists believe drive-through windows
contribute to errors
Newswise — Consumers who pick up their
prescription medications at a pharmacy
drive-through window might be jeopardizing
their own safety in the name of convenience.
A new study indicates that pharmacists who
work at locations with drive-through windows
believe the extra distractions associated
with window service contribute to processing
delays, reduced efficiency and even
dispensing errors.
The surveyed pharmacists reported that the
design and layout of their workplace has an
impact on dispensing accuracy, especially
the presence of drive-through window pick-up
services.
Results also indicate that automated
dispensing systems in pharmacies are likely
to reduce the potential for errors and
enhance efficiency.
The study suggests pharmacy design should
emphasize minimal workflow interruptions but
it also offers a caution to consumers to
check their prescription medications,
especially those obtained from a pharmacy’s
drive-through window, said Sheryl Szeinbach,
the study’s lead author and a professor of
pharmacy practice and administration at Ohio
State University.
“Maybe we ought to stop and consider: ‘Am I
likely to get the same level of service from
the drive-through as I am actually
interacting face-to-face with a health-care
professional?’” Szeinbach said.
With the number of prescriptions dispensed
annually in the United States nearing the 4
billion mark, Szeinbach said the public is
best served by pharmacists with the fewest
possible distractions.
Even with stringent internal quality
controls, pharmacists nationally make an
estimated 5.7 errors per 10,000
prescriptions processed, according to the
study, which translates to more than 2.2
million dispensing errors each year.
Responding pharmacists attributed about 80
percent of dispensing errors to cognitive
problems that Szeinbach said could be
associated with various disruptions that
interfere with their work.
The survey results were published in a
recent issue of theInternational
Journal for Quality in Health Care.
Szeinbach and colleagues surveyed 429 U.S.
pharmacists working at pharmacies located
within mass merchant retailers, traditional
chain drugstores or independently owned
shops.
The questionnaire sought pharmacists’
perceptions of how their practice was
affected by the pharmacy layout and design,
the presence of a drive-through window and
the availability of an automated dispensing
system.
Specifically,
they were asked whether those factors had a
positive or negative influence on errors in
dispensing, communication between staff and
pharmacists, prescription processing time,
efficiency and physical mobility in the
practice setting.
Participating pharmacists were asked to
respond to questions using a scale from 1 to
5, with 1 indicating pharmacists strongly
disagreed with suggestions that their
practice was affected by these factors and 5
meaning they strongly agree.
While the responding pharmacists agreed that
the layout and design of their workplace
could contribute to errors and reduce
efficiency, the presence of a drive-through
window elicited a much more definitive
response, Szeinbach said.
“The drive-through window, overall, poses a
huge problem with respect to causing
dispensing errors, contributing to
communication errors, delaying processing
and forcing staff to take more steps,”
Szeinbach said.
“Think about it – that window has to be in
an area that’s convenient for the patient
driving up to the window, yet may not – and
obviously is not – convenient to the
pharmacist and the staff. The link between
drive-through and dispensing errors alone
should be a concern to the public.”
She said the findings suggest that consumers
should always check the prescription
medications they pick up at a pharmacy to
confirm they received the right medicine.
According to the survey, pharmacists
perceive that the drive-through window has
the biggest impact on causing pharmacists
and their staff to take extra steps (average
agreement response of 3.7 on a 5-point
scale); reducing efficiency (average
response of 3.8); and causing delays in
prescription processing (average response of
3.7).
The respondents also attributed dispensing
errors (average response of 3.2) and
communication errors (average response of
3.3) to the presence of a drive-through
window.
Szeinbach suggested the addition of a
drive-through to a pharmacy has the
potential to place unreasonable multitasking
demands on professionals whose job includes
counseling patients about medication use,
not simply dispensing the drugs.
“A pharmacist or staff member could be
responsible for four or five tasks, and
serving people at the drive-through window
is just one of them,” she said.
“Some people seeking the convenience of the
drive-through window don’t care about
getting information. They just want the
medication, and they want it as fast as
possible. They should probably think about
that and at least look at the medication and
make sure it’s OK. And if they have
questions, it may behoove them to come into
the pharmacy.”
The study also identified a potential remedy
to this problem – automated dispensing
systems that count tablets or, in some
high-volume practices, are linked to the
pharmacy computer system so they can
complete the entire dispensing process.
Automated dispensing systems are typically
used for medications that are in
particularly high demand, such as
antibiotics, blood pressure medications and
painkillers.
“We found that this type of automated
dispensing definitely contributes to the
positive side – it’s less likely to cause
dispensing errors or errors in
communication, and can speed up the
processing. Pharmacists view the automation
as efficient and foolproof,” Szeinbach said.
She noted that an additional study comparing
actual error rates at pharmacies with and
without drive-through windows is needed to
verify her results.
“There’s a potential bias that could exist
against drive-through windows,” she said.
“But since the responding pharmacists
pointed out the drawbacks of both
drive-through windows and the entire layout
and design, and their responses are fairly
consistent, it leads me to believe their
perceptions are probably accurate.”
Szeinbach co-authored the study with Enrique
Seoane-Vazquez and graduate students Ashish
Parekh and Michelle Herderick, all of Ohio
State’s College of Pharmacy.