The EAHP Board, elected for three-year terms, oversees the association’s activities. Comprising directors responsible for core functions, it meets regularly to implement strategic goals. Supported by EAHP staff, the Board controls finances, coordinates congress organization, and ensures compliance with statutes and codes of conduct.
Using informatics to optimise a medicines saving programme in a large NHS trust
European Statement
Selection, Procurement and Distribution
Author(s)
Julie Featherstone, Alice Lo, Golnaz Douraghi-Zadeh
Why was it done?
The dashboard was initiated to provide accurate and timely expenditure data to the Medicines Value Team (MVT) which could then be appropriately interrogated and fed back to all relevant Trust and pharmacy staff. The aim was to quickly identify unexpected variance and progress on CIPs that allowed review with clinical and procurement teams.
What was done?
With the informatics team, a dashboard was developed to monitor medicines expenditure and Cost Improvement Plan (CIP) savings on a monthly basis. The dashboard incorporated varying tracking methods to provide timely data on biosimilar switching, contract price changes and individual medicine optimisation schemes at East Kent Hospitals University Foundation Trust (EKHUFT).
How was it done?
The dashboard required many hours working with the informatics team to ensure good understanding of the information required. Different CIPs had to be tracked and reported in different ways. A mixture of reporting and visual styles were needed to represent the data in a user-friendly way. It was recognised that data validation was required to ensure the accuracy of the dashboard, using a variety of recognised resources, e.g. RX Info.
What has been achieved?
A full, multi-tabular dashboard is available on the Trust Information Portal. Tracked expenditure data is reported monthly by the MVT at pharmacy and Trust meetings. This has enabled realistic and timely data to be included in overall financial forecasting and feedback to clinical teams on their CIPS. The dashboard has been designed to support the rapid addition of new schemes as they are identified to track potential savings and report at the earliest opportunity. The combined use of the dashboard with close MVT oversight has resulted in closer working with clinical and procurement teams. This has led to better identification, tracking and reporting of all medicines saving opportunities in the Trust, saving over £1 million in 2022/23.
What next?
The dashboard will continue to be developed further by the MVT to maximise the capture and reporting of CIPs at EKHUFT. It will also be used to support regular medicines value reviews with senior clinical pharmacists and their teams to help identify future medicines savings opportunities – essential in this challenging financial climate in the National Health Service (NHS).
THE ADDITION OF A COST ANALYSIS CHANGES THE OUTCOME OF A TENDER (submitted in 2019)
European Statement
Introductory Statements and Governance
Author(s)
Camilla Munk Mikkelsen
Why was it done?
Including a CA in the evaluation is time-consuming and I wanted to evaluate whether the obtained drug recommendation was different from the result we could have achieved without the inclusion of a CA. The CA process includes data collection from clinicians within resource consumption per drug, including the costs of time usage of physician, nurse and patient, transportation expenses, monitoring costs, blood tests, co-medicine, utensils, shipping and hospital facilities. When a CA is included it is possible to take the derived costs associated with treatment of different drug dispensing forms and specific costs of treatment with various analogue drugs into account to achieve a recommendation upon the lowest total price including the tender price and the derived costs associated with the treatment.
What was done?
Tenders are made on ATC-level 5, but clinically equivalent therapeutic areas are evaluated on ATC-level 4. The analogue competition is an important strategic tool when conducting tenders and elaborating national recommendations on therapeutic areas (TA). Since 2017 the evaluation of TA has been based on a clinical evaluation, an economic evaluation and a tender. Previously the call for tenders was based on clinical evidence only. To evaluate whether the addition of a cost analysis (CA) to a tender evaluation would alter the drug recommendation of TA, a re-evaluation of the processed TA, evaluated from October 2018 until October 2019, was made on multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and severe asthma.
How was it done?
The drug recommendations on TA made in the period was re-evaluated. Results from the cases with multiple sclerosis, rheumatoid arthritis and severe asthma were evaluated on clinical evaluation, tender price and finally with or without the CA.
What has been achieved?
From October 2018 to October 2019 three TA have ended the evaluation process. The recommendation of severe asthma had a similar outcome regardless of the process used. For multiple sclerosis and rheumatoid arthritis, the CA altered the drug recommendations.
What next?
In order to balance resource consumption on performing CA and the economic impact on the outcome, the plan is to identify TA where it isn’t meaningful to conduct a cost analysis. In all other areas a CA will be included in the standard procedures.