A multifaceted approach in leveraging electronic health record tools for safe inpatient use of concentrated U-500 insulin.

PURPOSE: The Institute for Safe Medication Practices classifies subcutaneous insulin as a high-risk medication. Concentrated U-500 insulin carries additional risks in comparison to conventional U-100 insulin, as the 5-fold more concentrated nature of this product, limitations to insulin pen dosing, and various devices for dose measurement may lead to miscommunication of patient-reported doses, resulting in downstream errors in ordering, verification, or administration. We describe a multifaceted approach to leveraging technical tools within the electronic health record (EHR) for U-500 insulin use. SUMMARY: At Cleveland Clinic, the U-500 insulin use process evolved in a number of phases using EHR tools. Phase 1 included new clinical decision support and documentation tools during order entry, including a customized alert that fired during order entry recommending that the prescriber order a consult with endocrinology and requiring the prescriber to provide the patient's home insulin measuring device and the source of the patient's reported home dose. In order verification, a customized alert fired directing the pharmacist to contact the patient or patient's nurse and validate the information provided by the prescriber. Phase 2 involved transitioning dispensing of patient-specific doses from tuberculin syringes to U-500 insulin syringes. Phase 3 transitioned to use of U-500 insulin pens and included automatic dose rounding of ordered doses down to the nearest 5 units, and an additional customized pharmacist alert intended for cost conservation was added to fire if the patient had a recent administration of U-500 insulin documented, directing the pharmacist to determine whether the nurse needed a new pen dispensed. CONCLUSION: Cleveland Clinic successfully implemented customized tools and processes within the EHR pertaining to the prescribing, verification, dispensing, and administration of U-500 insulin.

Comparison of IV oncology infusions compounded via robotics and gravimetrics-assisted workflow processes.

PURPOSE: A study was conducted to compare an intravenous (IV) gravimetric technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) platform to an IV robotic system. In the study we reviewed both IV technology platforms using the same gravimetric quality assurance system, which allowed for direct comparison. METHODS: All oncology preparations compounded from January 2016 through December 2018 using either system were included in our retrospective analysis. Final preparation accuracy, IV system precision, and workflow throughput (analyzed using lean process methodologies) were evaluated. RESULTS: Data analysis indicated that use of the IV gravimetric TAWF system was associated with a significantly lower percentage of accuracy errors compared to the IV robotics system (1.58% vs 2.47%, P < 0.001), with no significant difference in absolute precision (1.12 vs 1.12 P = 0.952). Lean analysis demonstrated that overall completion time (17:49 minutes vs 24:45 minutes) and compound preparation time (2:39 minutes vs 6:07 minutes) were less with the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotics system. CONCLUSION: Implementation of either an IV gravimetric TAWF system or IV robotics system will result in similar compounding accuracy and precision. Preparation time was less with use of the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotic system, but the IV robotic system required less human intervention. Both systems ensure medication safety for patients, although the IV robotic system has increased safeguards in place. Therefore, the primary driver for implementing these systems is alternative factors such as cost of systems implementation and maintenance, employee safety, and drug waste.