No / OBJECTIVES: Legislation and health policy enabling nurses and pharmacists to prescribe a comprehensive range of medicines has been in place in the UK since 2006. Our objective was to evaluate the clinical appropriateness of prescribing by these professionals. METHODS: A modified version of the Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) was used by 10 medical, seven pharmacist and three nurse independent raters to evaluate a sample of 100 audio-recorded consultations in which a medicine was prescribed by a nurse or pharmacist. Raters were current prescribers with recognized experience in prescribing. Consultations were recorded in nine clinical practice settings in England. RESULTS: Raters' analysis indicated that, in the majority of instances, nurses and pharmacists were prescribing clinically appropriately on all of the ten MAI criteria (indication, effectiveness, dosage, directions, practicality, drug-drug interaction, drug-disease interaction, duplication, duration, cost). Highest mean 'inappropriate' ratings were given for correct directions (nurses 12%; pharmacists 11%) and the cost of the drug prescribed (nurses 16% pharmacists 22%). Analysis of raters' qualitative comments identified two main themes: positive views on the overall safety and effectiveness of prescribing episodes; and potential for improvement in nurses' and pharmacists' history-taking, assessment and diagnosis skills. CONCLUSIONS: Nurses and pharmacists are generally making clinically appropriate prescribing decisions. Decisions about the cost of drugs prescribed and assessment and diagnostic skills are areas for quality improvement.

No / PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To assess and improve the safety of hospital-based adult chemotherapy administration. DESIGN: Prospective, systems-focused clinical risk assessment. SETTING: An adult inpatient and outpatient oncology unit in a large urban hospital in the United Kingdom. SAMPLE: 8-person nurse-led multidisciplinary team, which included managerial staff and patient safety researchers. METHODS: Failure mode and effects analysis (FMEA), a prospective, systems-focused risk assessment methodology, was undertaken in biweekly team meetings and included mapping the chemotherapy administration process, identifying and numerically prioritizing potential errors (failure modes) for each process step, and generating remedial strategies to counteract them. MAIN RESEARCH VARIABLES: The analysis aimed to identify chemotherapy administration failure modes and to generate remedial strategies to address them. User feedback on the FMEA process also was collected. FINDINGS: Several specific chemotherapy failure modes were identified, the majority of which had not previously been recognized, and several novel strategies to counteract them were generated. Many of the strategies were specific, environment-focused actions, which are simple, quick, and inexpensive to implement; however, more substantive, longer-term initiatives also were generated. User feedback generally was very positive, and the process of undertaking the analysis improved multidisciplinary teamwork and communication. CONCLUSIONS: Although time and resource intensive, FMEA is a useful safety improvement tool. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses should be aware of and informed about FMEA as a tool they can use in partnership with management and other disciplines to proactively and collectively improve the safety of high-risk oncology procedures such as chemotherapy administration.