***
Vishnu D. Gupta, PhD. Pharmaceutics Division. University of Houston, Houston,Texas
Abstract: A previously developed stability-indicating high-performance liquid chromatographic assay method was used to investigate the stability of glycopyrrolate in oral liquid dosage forms (0.5 mg/mL)that contained a 0.05-M phosphate buffer of pH 5.6 and either 10% sorbitol or 10% sucrose as the sweetening agent.The decomposition product and sorbitol or sucrose did not interfere with the assay procedure.The liquid dosage forms were prepared using com mercially available powder.After 129 days of storage at 25 °C, the loss in potency was less than 6%.The physical appearance of the dosage forms did not change during the study period.The pH value of the dosage forms in sorbitol did not change from the original value of 5.6.The pH value of the dosage forms in sucrose decreased from 5.6 to 4.8 after 129 days of storage at 25 °C.
Reference: Gupta VD. Stability of Oral Liquid Dosage Forms of Glycopyrrolate Prepared With the Use of Powder. IJPC 2003;7(5):386-388
Gilberto Barcelos Souza. Farmacêutico. Exerceu suas atividades durante 41 anos no Serviço de Farmácia do Hospital Universitário Antonio Pedro (HUAP). Membro da SBRAFH, SOBRAFO, SOBRATI ● 28 livros publicados ● Medicamentos Injetáveis ● Oncológicos Injetáveis e Orais ● Imunoterápicos ● Protocolos de Quimioterapia ● Interações Medicamentosas em Oncologia ● Formulário Magistral ● Medicamentos em Terapia Intensiva Pediátrica. Editor do www.meuslivrosdefarmacia.com.br
12 janeiro 2009
09 janeiro 2009
The impact of computerized prescribing on error rate in a department of Oncology
***
Small MDC, Barrett B, Price GM. The impact of computerized prescribing on error rate in a department of Oncology. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice 2008;14(4):181-187
Department of Pharmacy, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, United Kingdom
***
Purpose: A comparison of prescribing errors detected for computerized and spreadsheet prescriptions in the Department of Hematology and Oncology of the Norfolk and Norwich University hospital.
Methods: A prospective audit of 1941 prescriptions for chemotherapy was made from January to September 2005. Each new cycle of chemotherapy ordered was monitored for prescribing errors, which were analyzed by method of prescription (computerized or spreadsheet), prescriber, type, and severity.
Results: Computerized prescribing reduced errors by 42%. Errors occurred in 20% of spreadsheet prescriptions compared with 12% of the computerized prescriptions. There was a significant difference in error rates of three different prescribers whichever prescribing system was used. The proportion of errors that were minor was reduced and serious was increased with little change in the proportion of significant or life-threatening errors.
Conclusions: The impact of computerized prescribing on adverse drug events requires further evaluation. Prescriber training may be important in further reducing errors. The implementation of all the existing functions of the electronic system should lead to further reduction in errors.
References: Small MDC, Barrett B, Price GM. The impact of computerized prescribing on error rate in a department of Oncology/Hematology. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice 2008;14(4): 181-187
Small MDC, Barrett B, Price GM. The impact of computerized prescribing on error rate in a department of Oncology. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice 2008;14(4):181-187
Department of Pharmacy, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital, Norwich, United Kingdom
***
Purpose: A comparison of prescribing errors detected for computerized and spreadsheet prescriptions in the Department of Hematology and Oncology of the Norfolk and Norwich University hospital.
Methods: A prospective audit of 1941 prescriptions for chemotherapy was made from January to September 2005. Each new cycle of chemotherapy ordered was monitored for prescribing errors, which were analyzed by method of prescription (computerized or spreadsheet), prescriber, type, and severity.
Results: Computerized prescribing reduced errors by 42%. Errors occurred in 20% of spreadsheet prescriptions compared with 12% of the computerized prescriptions. There was a significant difference in error rates of three different prescribers whichever prescribing system was used. The proportion of errors that were minor was reduced and serious was increased with little change in the proportion of significant or life-threatening errors.
Conclusions: The impact of computerized prescribing on adverse drug events requires further evaluation. Prescriber training may be important in further reducing errors. The implementation of all the existing functions of the electronic system should lead to further reduction in errors.
References: Small MDC, Barrett B, Price GM. The impact of computerized prescribing on error rate in a department of Oncology/Hematology. Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice 2008;14(4): 181-187
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)