Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2011 Sep-Oct;18(5):645-51.
doi: 10.1136/amiajnl-2010-000034. Epub 2011 May 25.

Evaluation of the NCPDP Structured and Codified Sig Format for e-prescriptions

Affiliations

Evaluation of the NCPDP Structured and Codified Sig Format for e-prescriptions

Hangsheng Liu et al. J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 Sep-Oct.

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the ability of the structure and code sets specified in the National Council for Prescription Drug Programs Structured and Codified Sig Format to represent ambulatory electronic prescriptions.

Design: We parsed the Sig strings from a sample of 20,161 de-identified ambulatory e-prescriptions into variables representing the fields of the Structured and Codified Sig Format. A stratified random sample of these representations was then reviewed by a group of experts. For codified Sig fields, we attempted to map the actual words used by prescribers to the equivalent terms in the designated terminology.

Measurements: Proportion of prescriptions that the Format could fully represent; proportion of terms used that could be mapped to the designated terminology.

Results: The fields defined in the Format could fully represent 95% of Sigs (95% CI 93% to 97%), but ambiguities were identified, particularly in representing multiple-step instructions. The terms used by prescribers could be codified for only 60% of dose delivery methods, 84% of dose forms, 82% of vehicles, 95% of routes, 70% of sites, 33% of administration timings, and 93% of indications.

Limitations: The findings are based on a retrospective sample of ambulatory prescriptions derived mostly from primary care physicians.

Conclusion: The fields defined in the Format could represent most of the patient instructions in a large prescription sample, but prior to its mandatory adoption, further work is needed to ensure that potential ambiguities are addressed and that a complete set of terms is available for the codified fields.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: None.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Sample selection flow chart.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. National Council for Prescription Drug Programs Structured and Codified Sig Format Implementation Guide. Scottsdale, AZ: National Council for Prescription Drug Programs, 2008
    1. Bell DS, Schueth A, Crosson JC, et al. Pilot Testing of Electronic Prescribing Standards, 2007. http://www.rand.org/health/projects/erx/documents/NJ-EPAC_Pilot_Testing_... (accessed 9 Feb 2010).
    1. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), HHS Medicare program; standards for e-prescribing under Medicare Part D and identification of backward compatible version of adopted standard for e-prescribing and the Medicare prescription drug program (version 8.1). Final rule. Fed Regist 2008;73:18917–42 - PubMed
    1. Aspden D, Wolcott J, Bootman J, et al. Preventing Medication Errors. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press, 2007
    1. Ammenwerth E, Schnell-Inderst P, Machan C, et al. The effect of electronic prescribing on medication errors and adverse drug events: a systematic review. J Am Med Inform Assoc 2008;15:585–600 - PMC - PubMed

Publication types