Pharmacy, Singapore General Hospital Department of Pharmacy, Singapore.
Pharmacy, Singapore General Hospital Department of Pharmacy, Singapore
Eur J Hosp Pharm. 2021 Mar;28(2):100-105. doi: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2019-001997. Epub 2019 Nov 14.
To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two technology assisted manual medication picking systems vs traditional manual picking.
This was a retrospective observational study comparing three outpatient pharmacies of a tertiary referral hospital in Singapore, where a light-emitting diode (LED-guided) manual picking system, an LED-guided manual picking plus lockable drawer (LED-LD) system, and traditional manual picking were implemented, respectively. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of medication near-misses over the observation period. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per near-miss avoided was also determined. Data on medications picked and near-misses reported between September 2017 and June 2018 were retrieved from electronic databases. The incidence of medication near-misses from the LED-guided and LED-LD systems, relative to traditional picking, was compared using logistic regression. We compared annual operating costs between manual medication picking systems, and reported ICERs per near-miss avoided, to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of each picking system.
A total of 358 144, 397 343 and 254 162 medications were picked by traditional manual picking, LED-guided and LED-LD systems, respectively. The corresponding near-miss rates were 8.32, 4.08 and 0.69 per 10 000 medications picked, respectively. Medication near-miss rates were significantly lower for the LED-guided (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.40 to 0.59, p<0.001) and LED-LD systems (OR 0.08, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.13, p<0.001) compared with traditional picking. The annual operating costs of traditional picking, LED-guided and LED-LD systems were S$60 912, S$129 832 and S$152 894, respectively. The LED-guided and LED-LD systems yielded ICERs of S$189 and S$140 per near-miss avoided, respectively, compared with traditional manual picking.
The LED-LD system is more cost-effective than both the LED-guided and manual medication picking systems in reducing medication picking near-misses.
评估两种辅助手动配药系统与传统手动配药相比的成本效益。
这是一项回顾性观察性研究,比较了新加坡一家三级转诊医院的三个门诊药房,分别实施了发光二极管(LED)引导手动配药系统、带锁抽屉的 LED 引导手动配药系统(LED-LD 系统)和传统手动配药系统。主要结局指标为观察期间药物接近错误的发生率。还确定了每避免一次接近错误的增量成本效益比(ICER)。从 2017 年 9 月至 2018 年 6 月,从电子数据库中检索了配药和报告的接近错误数据。使用逻辑回归比较了 LED 引导和 LED-LD 系统与传统采集相比的药物接近错误发生率。我们比较了手动药物采集系统的年运营成本,并报告了每避免一次接近错误的 ICER,以评估每种采集系统的成本效益。
传统手动采集、LED 引导和 LED-LD 系统分别采集了 358144、397343 和 254162 种药物。相应的接近错误率分别为每 10000 种药物 8.32、4.08 和 0.69。LED 引导(OR 0.49,95%CI 0.40 至 0.59,p<0.001)和 LED-LD 系统(OR 0.08,95%CI 0.05 至 0.13,p<0.001)的药物接近错误率明显低于传统采集。传统采集、LED 引导和 LED-LD 系统的年运营成本分别为 60912 新加坡元、129832 新加坡元和 152894 新加坡元。LED 引导和 LED-LD 系统每避免一次接近错误的 ICER 分别为 189 新加坡元和 140 新加坡元,与传统手动配药相比。
与传统手动配药相比,LED-LD 系统在减少药物配药接近错误方面比 LED 引导和手动药物配药系统更具成本效益。