Impact of connected dispensing technology with advanced analytics in a multicenter health system.

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. PURPOSE: This study was designed to evaluate the impact of enterprise inventory optimization (EIO) technology and analytics on pharmacy labor, costs, and medication availability within a large integrated delivery network (IDN). METHODS: This article describes a mixed-methods, postmarket observational study assessing the impact of a solution of disparate technologies including automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs), centralized pharmacy inventory software, and controlled substance vaults connected by an inventory optimization analytics (IOA) tool. Four study modules were implemented over a 10-month period. The intervention consisted of implementation of the IOA software, linking the disparate automated technologies. Transactional data was collected and aggregated with user perception survey data in both the pre- and postintervention periods. Descriptive and comparative statistical testing was used to assess outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 11 facilities with bed counts ranging between 22 and 908 beds were included in this study. At an enterprise level, users were able to complete an average of 2.8 times more periodic automated replenishment (PAR) level changes post intervention, resulting in an estimated enterprise labor avoidance of over 1 full-time equivalent (2,099 labor hours) annually. Despite an enterprise decision to increase ADC inventory on hand from a 3-day supply to a 5-day supply, 5 sites (45%) had a decrease in total inventory, while 9 sites (82%) saw a decrease in ADC inventory costs. Additionally, 7 sites (64%) saw a reduction in the ADC stockout percentage and all 11 sites (100%) saw a decrease in the central pharmacy stockout percentage post intervention. CONCLUSION: Integration and optimization of connected inventory management technology was observed to have positive impacts on improving labor productivity, reducing ADC inventory carrying costs, and increasing medication availability.

Exploring the Value of Medical Affairs Learning Experiences for Pharmacy Students and Residents.

The objective of this article is 3-fold: to strengthen the understanding of medical affairs (MA) among pharmacy professionals; to provide greater visibility into the value experienced by educators, learners, and the practice of pharmacy across the health care ecosystem when MA learning opportunities are available; and to provide a framework for organizations who seek to establish an MA experiential rotation. The authors collated information from published literature, anecdotal experience, and interviews with experiential education leaders from several colleges of pharmacy. As a result, the article summarizes the current perceptions of MA practice among educators and students and highlights how MA experiences may support pharmacy learners in the future.

Utilization of a technology-assisted workflow to prepare controlled substance oral syringes.

PURPOSE: Utilization of technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) systems has gained popularity in the sterile compounding setting. This study was designed to evaluate whether safety and efficiency could be seen when preparing oral controlled substance doses gravimetrically vs volumetrically. METHODS: This 2-phase observational study combined manual data collection with automated logs generated by a single TAWF. During phase I, oral controlled substance solutions were prepared volumetrically. In phase II, the same subset of medications was to be prepared gravimetrically via the same TAWF. Findings from phases I and II were compared against each another to determine safety, efficiency, and documentation differences between the volumetric and gravimetric workflows. RESULTS: Thirteen different medications were evaluated during phase I (1,495 preparations) and phase II (1,781 preparations) of this study. Mean compounding time (min:sec) increased in phase II when compared to phase I (1:49 vs 1:28; P < 0.01), with the deviation detection rate also increasing (7.9% vs 4.7%; P < 0.01). Despite a target in phase II of utilizing gravimetric analysis for more than 80% of preparations, only 45.5% (811 preparations) were prepared with this workflow, as adoption challenges and dose size limitations prevented compliance. Doses that were prepared gravimetrically had a mean accuracy rate of 100.6% (the mean achieved dose was 0.6% higher than the mean prescribed dose) and a rejection rate of 0.99% (compared to the phase I rejection rate of 1.07%; P = 0.67). CONCLUSION: The gravimetric workflow provided accuracy and additional safety checks when compared to the volumetric alternative, all while providing users with greater access to data. Health systems should consider staffing, product sourcing, patient populations, and medication safety when determining the balance between volumetric and gravimetric workflows.