No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundOur pharmacy has recently purchased an automated storage and dispensing robot (Rowa VMAX). While offering greater safety and better management of pharmaceuticals, automated globalised distribution encounters limits: unit doses and bulky pharmaceuticals cannot be stored in this type of robot contributing to the loss of the benefits of automation.Such a system is not suitable for the management of Medication Units Free of Secondary Packaging (MUF-SP) when drugs are returned from the wards to the pharmacy.PurposeTo present an original management system for MUF-SP and to measure its financial impact.Material and methodsWe developed software that enabled us to print a DATAMATRIX specific label recognised by our robot when we entered the drug reference, an expiry date and the batch number.Boxes were purchased to allow the Recycling of Drug Units (RDU) and were identified by their label. Returned drugs put in one of these boxes join the conventional automated system of globalised distribution.Eligibility criteria for the RDU were: a unit price between €0.50 and 5 (for medicines distributed at least once a week); units over €5 and all the antibiotics.Over one month, the amounts saved by not discarding the units eligible for the RDU and the costs of the whole process were estimated.Results1576 drug units were returned to the pharmacy from the wards.40.6% were MUF-SP. Of these units, 45% were eligible for the RDU and saved €615.43 (86% of the price of the MUF-SP).22 different drugs were recycled, of which 19 were antibiotics.The estimated average time required to generate the whole system was 108 s per item and cost €0.84 per item (including staff and consumables costs). The total cost of the process was €19.14.ConclusionThis solution enables savings (compared to the described process costs), better safety and management. Such a method could reasonably be extended to other hospitals.References and/or acknowledgements1 Bonnabry P, Carrez L, Gschwind L, et al. Robotisation de la distribution globale des médicaments: impact sur le taux d’erreur. Le Pharmacien Hospitalier et Clinicien; doi:10.1016/j.phclin.2011.12.251No conflict of interest.

BackgroundIn order to plan the managemenet a cytotoxic drugs preparation unit (CPDU), pharmacists used a scientific reference source1 it recommended 5 pharmacy technicians for 26,000 preparations per year. 50% of technician effective working time should be spent to preparation and 50% on associated activities (AA).PurposeWhat about in practice? The aim of this study was to assess the technicians’ work load in real life.Material and methods5 technicians were hired in a CPDU in which 60% of the production was for use outside the hospital. Over one week, the times spent on the preparation and on 15 AAs was measured. The staff had to fill in a form giving the exact start and end times of the tasks. The different data collected were analysed and expressed in percentages.Results57% of technician effective working time was allocated to preparation. 9 AAs (36%) were fully done by technicians, the main ones being: preparation of sterilisation trays (17.4%), dressings, hygiene protocols (6%), managing orders (3.4%), schedule organisation (2%). The other AAs such as taking bacterial samples, inventory management, required the help of two additional logistics staff (47% of their working time). Without the help of logistics staff, all the AAs would need 58% of effective working time.ConclusionCompared with our data, the reference source underestimates the time required for preparation and AAs, by 7.4% and 8% respectively. The additional time needed for preparation is explained by the fact that reference data are not accurate for specific preparations. Furthermore, AAs need more time because of the large amount of work outsourced to our department, which isn’t mentioned in the reference source. This study showed that 6 technicians are necessary, instead of the 5 recommended by the guidelines. Moreover, with the new national law concerning hospital organisation, the CDPUs are going to change and the outsourced work they perform will increase; the guidelines need to be reviewed.ReferenceSociété Française de Pharmacie OncologiqueNo conflict of interest.