Medeiros, Paulo José deMachado, Marcelo Muniz2019-01-112019-01-112018-07-19MACHADO, Marcelo Muniz. Métodos seguros para prescrição, dispensação e administração de medicamentos potencialmente perigosos. 2018. 77f. Dissertação (Mestrado Profissional em Gestão da Qualidade em Serviços de Saúde) - Centro de Ciências da Saúde, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2018.https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/26484Introduction: Drug-related problems (DRP) are among the leading causes of adverse events in the world. Unsafe drug use processes and medication errors are some of the leading causes of health care damage. Damage can occur at different stages of the drug use process. The development of precise processes that aim to mitigate medication errors are indissociable aspects of safe care. In order to improve the processes in health services, the elaboration of a cycle of improvement in the processes of use of potentially hazardous drugs (PHD) is amply justified. Objective: To evaluate the results of a cycle of improvement in the quality of PHD prescribing, dispensing and administration processes in a public hospital. Methodology: The present study consisted of a cycle of internal improvement, based on an intervention study using a quasi-experimental, time series, uncontrolled design. 14 quality criteria were established based on the selected references. Preliminarily, all the criteria were evaluated with the objective of establishing a situational diagnosis. The errors in PHD prescription, dispensation and administration processes practiced in the participating hospital were evaluated from a quantitative point of view. From multiprofessional collegiate using the nominal group technique, the causes were assigned to the problems encountered and the necessary action plans were established to improve the quality of the target processes of the study. Results: In the first evaluation it was verified that there was a low compliance in the criteria of safety in the prescription and the administration of PHD; in contrast, the PHD dispensing processes evaluated obtained 100% compliance. After the implementation of the proposed actions, new evaluations were carried out to measure the improvement achieved. In the second evaluation it was verified that the improvement actions were effective in a relative improvement of 72.8% (p <0.001) in the safety criterion in PHD prescription and a relative improvement of 66.78% (p <0.001) in the safety criterion of PHD administration. In the third evaluation no prescription errors were found, resulting in a one-time compliance level of 100%. Additionally, the level of compliance with the PHD dispensing safety criterion remained close to 100%, around 97%. On the other hand, it was observed that the improvement obtained in the safety criterion in the PHD administration soon after the intervention was not sustainable, presenting results close to the first evaluation. Conclusion: By analyzing the results, it was concluded that the improvement cycle was effective in the proposed objectives since the positive impact of the interventions was evident. However, in the safety criterion in drug administration, a better reflection is needed on the double-checking process adopted by the institution, in view of the lack of sustainability of the improvements achieved after the intervention.Acesso AbertoPotencialmente perigososErros de medicaçãoSegurança do pacientemasterThesisCNPQ::CIENCIAS DA SAUDE: GESTÃO DA QUALIDADE EM SERVIÇOS DE SAÚDE