ABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this systematic review was to assess the clinical, economic, and health resource utilization outcomes associated with the use of prefilled syringes in medication administration compared with traditional preparation methods. DATA SOURCES: We conducted a systematic literature review to evaluate outcomes such as medication errors, wastage, time savings, and contamination in prefilled syringes. Our search encompassed multiple databases, including PubMed and Embase, for studies published between January 1, 2017, and November 1, 2022. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Peer-reviewed publications meeting our inclusion criteria underwent rigorous screening, including title, abstract, and full-text article assessments, performed by two reviewers. DATA SYNTHESIS: Among reviewed articles, 24 met our eligibility criteria. Selected studies were primarily observational (46%) and conducted in Europe (46%). Our findings indicated that prefilled syringes consistently reduced medication errors (by 10%-73%), adverse events (from 1.1 to 0.275 per 100 administrations), wastage (by up to 80% of drug), and preparation time (from 4.0 to 338.0 seconds) (ranges varied by drug type, setting, and dosage). However, there was limited data on contamination. Economically, prefilled syringes reduced waste and error rates, which may translate into overall savings. RELEVANCE TO PATIENT CARE AND CLINICAL PRACTICE: This review highlights the value of prefilled syringes, which can streamline medication delivery, save nursing time, and reduce preventable medication errors. Moreover, prefilled syringes have the potential to minimize medication wastage, optimizing resource utilization and efficiency in health care settings. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Our findings provide new insights into clinical and economic benefits of prefilled syringe adoption. These benefits include improved medication delivery and safety, which can lead to time and cost reductions for health care departments, hospitals, and health systems. However, further real-world research on clinical and economic outcomes, especially in contamination, is needed to better understand the benefits of prefilled syringes.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Seasonal influenza may result in severe outcomes, resulting in a significant increase of hospitalizations during the winter. To improve the protection provided by the standard dose influenza quadrivalent vaccine (SDQIV), a high-dose vaccine (HDQIV) has been developed specifically for adults aged 60 and older who are at higher risk of life-threatening complications. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of HD QIV vs. SD-QIV in the recommended population of three European countries: Belgium, Finland and Portugal. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis comparing HDQIV vs. SDQIV was conducted using a decision tree estimating health outcomes conditional on influenza: cases, general practitioner and emergency department visits, hospitalizations and deaths. To account for the full benefit of the vaccine, an additional outcome-hospitalizations attributable to influenza-was also evaluated. Demographic, epidemiological and economic inputs were based on the respective local data. HDQIV relative vaccine efficacy vs. SDQIV was obtained from a phase IV efficacy randomized clinical trial. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICER) were computed for each country, and a probabilistic sensitivity analysis (1,000 simulations per country) was performed to assess the robustness of the results. RESULTS: In the base case analysis, HDQIV resulted in improved health outcomes (visits, hospitalizations, and deaths) compared to SDQIV. The ICERs computed were 1,397, 9,581, and 15,267 /QALY, whereas the PSA yielded 100, 100, and 84% of simulations being cost-effective at their respective willingness-to-pay thresholds, for Belgium, Finland, and Portugal, respectively. CONCLUSION: In three European countries with different healthcare systems, HD-QIV would contribute to a significant improvement in the prevention of influenza health outcomes while being cost-effective.
