Letters to the Editor
Electronic prescribing in general practice
- Aust Prescr 2001;24:80-2
- 1 July 2001
- DOI: 10.18773/austprescr.2001.091
The Editorial Executive Committee welcomes letters, which should be less than 250 words. Before a decision to publish is made, letters which refer to a published article may be sent to the author for a response. Any letter may be sent to an expert for comment. When letters are published, they are usually accompanied in the same issue by their responses or comments. The Committee screens out discourteous, inaccurate or libellous statements. The letters are sub-edited before publication. Authors are required to declare any conflicts of interest. The Committee's decision on publication is final.
Editor, – I am writing to express my concern over the amount of errors I have seen with computer-generated prescriptions. The most alarming example I saw recently was a prescription for fluvastatin which was meant to be Fluvax [influenza vaccine]. Aside from this I have also encountered numerous prescriptions with incorrect dosages (e.g. 14 nocte for Rulide [roxithromycin] 300 mg) and many examples of incorrect strengths (e.g. Adalat [nifedipine] 60 mg instead of 30 mg). There are also a huge number of prescriptions printed out as private when they clearly are not.
Nearly all of these mistakes can easily be picked up by the doctor with a quick check of the script they have just printed out and simply require a quick handwritten correction. Computer-generated prescriptions are certainly an enormous improvement over their handwritten counterparts, however improvements can still be made with a tiny amount of effort.
Gold Coast, Qld.