为医院环境中的预填充肠外药物输送创建循证经济模型。

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Job F H Eijsink, Mia Weiss, Ashley Taneja, Tyler Edwards, Haymen Girgis, Betsy J Lahue, Kristen A Cribbs, Maarten Postma
{"title":"为医院环境中的预填充肠外药物输送创建循证经济模型。","authors":"Job F H Eijsink, Mia Weiss, Ashley Taneja, Tyler Edwards, Haymen Girgis, Betsy J Lahue, Kristen A Cribbs, Maarten Postma","doi":"10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003620","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Prefilled syringes (PFS) may offer clinical and economic advantages over conventional parenteral medication delivery methods (vials and ampoules). The benefits of converting from vials and ampoules to PFS have been explained in previous drug-specific economic models; however, these models have limited generalisability to different drugs, healthcare settings and other countries. Our study aims to (1) present a comprehensive economic model to assess the impact of switching from vials to PFS delivery; and (2) illustrate through two case studies the model's utility by highlighting important features of shifting from vials to PFS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The economic model estimates the potential benefit of switching to PFS associated with four key outcomes: preventable adverse drug events (pADE), preparation time, unused drugs, and cost of supplies. Model reference values were derived from existing peer-reviewed literature sources. The user inputs specific information related to the department, drug, and dose of interest and can change reference values. Two hypothetical case studies are presented to showcase model utility. The first concerns a cardiac intensive care unit in the United Kingdom administering 30 doses of 1 mg/10 mL atropine/day. The second concerns a coronavirus (COVID-19) intensive care unit in France that administers 30 doses of 10 mg/25 mL ephedrine/day.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total cost savings per hospital per year, associated with reductions in pADEs, unused drugs, drug cost and cost of supplies were £34 829 for the atropine example and €104 570 for the ephedrine example. Annual preparation time decreased by 371 and 234 hours in the atropine and ephedrine examples, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The model provides a generalisable framework with customisable inputs, giving hospitals a comprehensive view of the clinical and economic value of adopting PFS. Despite increased costs per dose with PFS, the hypothetical case studies showed notable reductions in medication preparation time and a net budget savings owing to fewer pADEs and reduced drug wastage.</p>","PeriodicalId":12050,"journal":{"name":"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice","volume":" ","pages":"564-570"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Creating an evidence-based economic model for prefilled parenteral medication delivery in the hospital setting.\",\"authors\":\"Job F H Eijsink, Mia Weiss, Ashley Taneja, Tyler Edwards, Haymen Girgis, Betsy J Lahue, Kristen A Cribbs, Maarten Postma\",\"doi\":\"10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003620\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Prefilled syringes (PFS) may offer clinical and economic advantages over conventional parenteral medication delivery methods (vials and ampoules). The benefits of converting from vials and ampoules to PFS have been explained in previous drug-specific economic models; however, these models have limited generalisability to different drugs, healthcare settings and other countries. Our study aims to (1) present a comprehensive economic model to assess the impact of switching from vials to PFS delivery; and (2) illustrate through two case studies the model's utility by highlighting important features of shifting from vials to PFS.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The economic model estimates the potential benefit of switching to PFS associated with four key outcomes: preventable adverse drug events (pADE), preparation time, unused drugs, and cost of supplies. Model reference values were derived from existing peer-reviewed literature sources. The user inputs specific information related to the department, drug, and dose of interest and can change reference values. Two hypothetical case studies are presented to showcase model utility. The first concerns a cardiac intensive care unit in the United Kingdom administering 30 doses of 1 mg/10 mL atropine/day. The second concerns a coronavirus (COVID-19) intensive care unit in France that administers 30 doses of 10 mg/25 mL ephedrine/day.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Total cost savings per hospital per year, associated with reductions in pADEs, unused drugs, drug cost and cost of supplies were £34 829 for the atropine example and €104 570 for the ephedrine example. Annual preparation time decreased by 371 and 234 hours in the atropine and ephedrine examples, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The model provides a generalisable framework with customisable inputs, giving hospitals a comprehensive view of the clinical and economic value of adopting PFS. Despite increased costs per dose with PFS, the hypothetical case studies showed notable reductions in medication preparation time and a net budget savings owing to fewer pADEs and reduced drug wastage.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12050,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"564-570\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003620\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/ejhpharm-2022-003620","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:与传统的肠外给药方法(药瓶和安瓿)相比,预灌封注射器(PFS)可能具有临床和经济优势。以往针对特定药物的经济模型已经解释了从药瓶和安瓿转换为预灌封注射器的好处;但是,这些模型对不同药物、医疗环境和其他国家的通用性有限。我们的研究旨在:(1) 提出一个全面的经济模型,以评估从药瓶转为 PFS 给药方式的影响;(2) 通过两个案例研究,强调从药瓶转为 PFS 给药方式的重要特点,从而说明该模型的实用性:该经济模型估算了改用 PFS 后与以下四种关键结果相关的潜在效益:可预防的药物不良事件 (pADE)、准备时间、未使用的药物和耗材成本。模型参考值来自现有的同行评审文献资料。用户输入与科室、药物和相关剂量有关的具体信息,即可更改参考值。本文介绍了两个假设案例研究,以展示模型的实用性。第一个案例涉及英国的心脏重症监护病房,每天使用 30 次 1 mg/10 mL 阿托品。第二个案例涉及法国的冠状病毒(COVID-19)重症监护病房,该病房每天使用 30 次 10 毫克/25 毫升麻黄碱:结果:由于减少了 pADE、未使用药物、药物成本和耗材成本,每家医院每年共节省成本 34 829 英镑(以阿托品为例)和 104 570 欧元(以麻黄碱为例)。在阿托品和麻黄碱的例子中,每年的准备时间分别减少了 371 小时和 234 小时:该模型提供了一个可定制输入的通用框架,使医院能够全面了解采用 PFS 的临床和经济价值。尽管采用 PFS 会增加单位剂量的成本,但假设案例研究表明,由于减少了 pADE 和药物浪费,药物准备时间显著缩短,预算也得到了净节省。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Creating an evidence-based economic model for prefilled parenteral medication delivery in the hospital setting.

Objectives: Prefilled syringes (PFS) may offer clinical and economic advantages over conventional parenteral medication delivery methods (vials and ampoules). The benefits of converting from vials and ampoules to PFS have been explained in previous drug-specific economic models; however, these models have limited generalisability to different drugs, healthcare settings and other countries. Our study aims to (1) present a comprehensive economic model to assess the impact of switching from vials to PFS delivery; and (2) illustrate through two case studies the model's utility by highlighting important features of shifting from vials to PFS.

Methods: The economic model estimates the potential benefit of switching to PFS associated with four key outcomes: preventable adverse drug events (pADE), preparation time, unused drugs, and cost of supplies. Model reference values were derived from existing peer-reviewed literature sources. The user inputs specific information related to the department, drug, and dose of interest and can change reference values. Two hypothetical case studies are presented to showcase model utility. The first concerns a cardiac intensive care unit in the United Kingdom administering 30 doses of 1 mg/10 mL atropine/day. The second concerns a coronavirus (COVID-19) intensive care unit in France that administers 30 doses of 10 mg/25 mL ephedrine/day.

Results: Total cost savings per hospital per year, associated with reductions in pADEs, unused drugs, drug cost and cost of supplies were £34 829 for the atropine example and €104 570 for the ephedrine example. Annual preparation time decreased by 371 and 234 hours in the atropine and ephedrine examples, respectively.

Conclusions: The model provides a generalisable framework with customisable inputs, giving hospitals a comprehensive view of the clinical and economic value of adopting PFS. Despite increased costs per dose with PFS, the hypothetical case studies showed notable reductions in medication preparation time and a net budget savings owing to fewer pADEs and reduced drug wastage.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.40
自引率
5.90%
发文量
104
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy (EJHP) offers a high quality, peer-reviewed platform for the publication of practical and innovative research which aims to strengthen the profile and professional status of hospital pharmacists. EJHP is committed to being the leading journal on all aspects of hospital pharmacy, thereby advancing the science, practice and profession of hospital pharmacy. The journal aims to become a major source for education and inspiration to improve practice and the standard of patient care in hospitals and related institutions worldwide. EJHP is the only official journal of the European Association of Hospital Pharmacists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信