Error Detection and Cost Savings With an Image-Based Workflow Management System Connected to a Computerized Prescription Order Entry Program for Antineoplastic Compounding

Use and impact of technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) systems for drug compounding in pharmacy practice: a scoping literature review

Objectives

The aim of this study was to review studies describing the use and the impact of technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) systems for drug compounding in hospital pharmacy.

Content

This is a scoping literature review. A search was conducted on studies describing or evaluating the use of TAWF published from January 1st, 2015 to July 31st, 2021. Two databases were searched (PubMed and Embase), followed by a search on Google Scholar.

Summary

218 articles were screened and 17 were identified as meeting the inclusion criteria. TAWFs all included preparation assistance software (17/17), barcode reader (17/17), photo or video taking (17/17), and some included gravimetric systems (8/17), and the use of robots (2/17). A majority of the studies included used technology for parenteral preparations (15/17, one for oral preparations only (1/17), and one used technology for both types of preparations (1/17). Most of the articles selected presented drugs prepared for adults (10/17), the others presented drugs intended for children (4/17) or for a mix of adults and children (3/17). Four parameters were evaluated: error detection rate (n=15), preparation and validation time (n=7), and costs generated or saved (n=7). Ten studies evaluated the pre-post impact of implantation of a TAWF (10/17).

Outlook

Given the heterogeneity of the data available, the use of TAWF was associated with an increased ability to detect preparation errors, a reduction in preparation time and costs, and increased satisfaction of pharmacy technicians and pharmacists. However, better quality studies are needed to confirm the positive impacts studied.

Automated compounding technology and workflow solutions for the preparation of chemotherapy: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

The current systematic review (SR) was undertaken to summarise the published literature reporting the clinical and economic value of automation for chemotherapy preparation management to include compounding workflow software and robotic compounding systems.

METHODS

Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library on 16 November 2017 to identify publications investigating chemotherapy compounding workflow software solutions used in a hospital pharmacy for the preparation of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

5175 publications were screened by title and abstract and 18 of 72 full publications screened were included. Grey literature searching identified an additional seven publications. The SR identified 25 publications relating to commercial technologies for compounding (Robotic compounding systems: APOTECAchemo (n=12), CytoCare (n=5) and RIVA (n=1); Workflow software: Cato (n=6) and Diana (n=1)). The studies demonstrate that compounding technologies improved accuracy in dose preparations and reduced dose errors compared with manual compounding. Comparable levels of contamination were reported for technologies compared with manual compounding. The compounding technologies were associated with reductions in annual costs compared with manual compounding, but the impact on compounding times was not consistent and was dependent on the type of compounding technology.

CONCLUSIONS

The published evidence suggests that the implementation of chemotherapy compounding automation solutions may reduce compounding errors and reduce costs; however, this is highly variable depending on the form of automation. In addition, the available evidence is heterogeneous, sparse and inconsistently reported. A key finding from the current SR is a 'call to action' to encourage pharmacists to publish data following implementation of chemotherapy compounding technologies in their hospital, which would allow for evidence-based recommendations on the benefits of chemotherapy compounding technologies.

Cost-effectiveness of newer regimens for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: review of the literature and real-world data

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To investigate the cost of netupitant and palonosetron (NEPA) in the prophylaxis of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) in adults receiving highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC) and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) for cancer treatment in real life.

RECENT FINDINGS

A retrospective analysis of all consecutives patients with advanced lung cancer treated in platinum-based (carboplatin or cisplatin) chemotherapy and with breast cancer treated with anthracycline and cyclophosphamide -based chemotherapy at our Medical Oncology Unit during 4 years was performed. The costs of drugs are at the Pharmacy of our Hospital (&OV0556;).

SUMMARY

We evaluated 110 patients with lung cancer and 55 patients with breast cancer. Concerning lung cancer, we have obtained an advantage of 133 &OV0556; in monthly medical costs of NEPA and dexamethasone (DEX) vs. the combination of palonosetron (PALO) and DEX for each patient. Concerning breast cancer, we have obtained an advantage of 78 &OV0556; in monthly medical costs of NEPA and DEX vs. the combination of PALO and DEX for each patient. Combining the medical costs of antiemetic therapy with the measure of efficacy represented by the complete response, the combination of NEPA and DEX is cost-effective for preventing CINV in HEC and MEC cancer treatment.