Pdf

Author(s)

Elisabeth CESAR, Ludivine LECHEVRETEL, Adrien NIERENBERGER, Laurent DIETRICH, Anne FEGER-FALK

Why was it done?

We decided to experiment this new solution on coronarography-packs, which presents the biggest rotation among surgery-packs (5,392 units estimated for 2,023), in order to improve working conditions of logistic workers, decrease musculoskeletal disorders (MSD) and optimise storage.

What was done?

Pallet box have been implemented as a new logistic solution for surgery-packs in our hospital pharmacy on a proposal from one of our biggest suppliers. The aim of this comparative study between 52-pack pallet boxes and the previous storage solution by 4-pack boxes was to assess the potential benefit on handling work, storage, waste and its economic impact.

How was it done?

In order to compare these two solutions, we clocked the time and evaluated the cost of transport from delivery gate to storage room and healthcare-unit order-picking step (from picking up the first pack to cardboard flattening). We also estimated the amount of waste associated.

What has been achieved?

Pallet-boxes enable a 24% room saving (52 pallet-spots yearly (2 pallet-boxes piled on one spot) instead of 68) and a 31% global time saving (22 hours yearly (13h transport + 9h order picking) instead of 32 hours (17h transport + 15h order picking)). Time saving on order picking was 40%: picking step of one pack from a pallet box requires on average 6 seconds whereas 10 seconds were needed from 4-packs-boxes. Yearly 104 pallet-boxes (603 kg of empty cardboards) will be manipulated whereas 1,348 4-pack-boxes (1,213 kg) used to be handled resulting in a 2-fold decrease. Even though pallet-boxes halve cardboard-waste, they represent 1.5 times more wooden-pallets’ waste (104 versus 68). Furthermore the price of coronarography-packs are impacted by a 2% increase representing around 4,100€ yearly which is not balanced by savings on transport or order picking (10h ≈ 150€).

What next?

Logistic workers are unanimously satisfied in implementing pallet-boxes as it facilitates their work on many aspects: pallet transport, order picking, waste disposal. Despite being costlier, a decision has been made to implement pallet-boxes in the long-term in order to improve waste management and working conditions of logistic workers. Our hospital pharmacy is already thinking about extending pallet-boxes to other references in order to assess more precisely their impact on MSD in logistic workers.

Pdf

Author(s)

Lykke Henriette Sandholt, Charlotte Kok Fredslund

Why was it done?

Early in the COVID-19 pandemic, it became apparent that backorders for many medicines could arise worldwide. In Denmark, the same medicines are used in all hospitals for 1 or 2 years. As hospitals report estimates for the same drugs, it was possible to establish a national safety stockpile.

What was done?

In March 2020, Amgros established a national pharmaceutical safety stockpile for the Danish health authorities. The facility partner was approved, and the warehouse was constructed within a few months. Experience over the past three years has led to a national strategic stockpile run by Amgros on behalf of the Danish regions and Amgros.

How was it done?

Working with clinicians, clinical pharmacists, hospital pharmacies, and the Danish Medicines Agency, the range for the safety stock was identified based on defined criteria. Hospital pharmacies were also required to purchase from the safety stock. The warehouse was replaced every three to six months depending on criticality, and therefore was the risk of waste minimized. A procurement team was set up in Amgros, which established a good working relationship with pharmaceutical suppliers to identify backorders. The purchasing pharmacist regularly met with health professionals regarding drug numbers and quantity adjustments.

What has been achieved?

Throughout the COVID-19 pandemic, security of supply remained intact, mainly due to collaboration between healthcare actors, suppliers, and Amgros. The experience gained over the past three years has resulted in establishment of a national strategic stockpile. Danish regions run this stockpile in cooperation with Amgros. Selection of warehouse partner is among other things based on profitability and sustainability.

What next?

After establishing the strategic stockpile, the Danish regions and Amgros took over financial responsibility from the Danish authorities. A working group has been established, including hospital pharmacies and Amgros, to assess stock volumes at the warehouse. Medicines with unstable security of supply are stocked. Input from suppliers is highly valued. All tenders are monitored so the working group can add or delete medicines. We ensure supply when consumption is high (seasonal fluctuations). The goal of the strategic stockpile is to maintain security of supply and, thus, treatment of patients at Danish hospitals. As well as act promptly on announced and urgent backorders.

Pdf

Author(s)

Helge Ovesen

Why was it done?

In November 2022 St Olav’s hospital, a large university hospital, introduced electronic prescribing and closed loop medication for more than 700 beds. Oral medications are predominantly available as unit doses, other medications as barcoded packages. After go-live with the bedside scanning, data showed that a large part of the administrations and preparations did not happen with barcode scanning. The hospital needed to understand the reason for this in more detail.

What was done?

A team of pharmacists, nurses and IT personnel have analysed technical reasons why medications are not scanned at the patient’s bedside during administration or when doing preparation in the wards’ medicine room.

How was it done?

The group collected data on all scans that had failed and analyzed the input to the barcode scanner. In addition, the nursing staff lead was consulted to provide more information of the problems with the physical packages for the medication and how that affected the work process of achieving closed loop medication. Products that did not have a printed barcode at all were not included in the analysis.

What has been achieved?

Six different areas were identified when trying to describe the problems with closed loop medication and scanning of medicine:
1. Barcode printed on package but missing product code/GTIN in the system/national drug registry.
2. Barcode printed on package but with wrong implementation of ISO/GS1 encoding.
3. Barcode printed on package but hidden for the user on the package label.
4. Barcode only printed on the outer package that was removed when stored in the medicine room.
5. QR codes with links to training materials or other barcodes confused the nurse and the wrong code was scanned.
6. Barcode printed on package but contrast for the barcode scanning was not good enough (ex. dark vials with black barcodes).
The problems have been shared with drug manufacturers and competent authorities to raise awareness of how drug package design and correct/incorrect use of barcode printing affect implementation of closed loop medication.

What next?

Work together with national drug registries in Norway and drug manufacturers to create a national best practice for barcode printing on drug packages. The work should be coordinated with work on a European level.

Pdf

Author(s)

Anna Harjans, Dominic Störzinger, Torsten Hoppe-Tichy

Why was it done?

Nowadays, norflurane is often used as MDIs’ propellant. It has a Global Warming Potential (GWP) 1,430 times higher than CO2. Therefore, MDIs cause larger emissions than DPIs. By lowering the numbers of MDIs in-house prescriptions, savings of emissions can be achieved.

What was done?

All Metered Dose Inhalers (MDI) of our formulary were screened for the following criteria:
– Which Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient(s) (API) are contained?
– Are comparable Direct Powder Inhalers (DPI) available?
– Can MDIs be replaced by a DPI considering wards and patients’ needs?
Distribution numbers one year before/after formulary adaptation were analysed. Furthermore, subsequent savings of greenhouse gas emissions have been calculated.
Note: Different devices cause different Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) emissions because of their individual product life cycle, means that CO2e-calculations are depending on the manufacturer. Thus, it is imperative to name the exact devices in this analysis.

How was it done?

Availability of comparable DPIs with the same (combination of) API(s) and dosage for each MDI was assessed for the German market. Wards with highest orders of MDIs were identified to see who may be affected by a device change. Physicians in charge were contacted to replace MDIs where possible. Subsequently the formulary was adapted.
Saved emissions were calculated on the basis of current literature [Foster® 100/6 µg: 94.42 g CO2e/puff, Foster® NEXThaler® 100/6 µg: 7.63 g CO2e/puff (Pangione, S., et al. (2020))].

What has been achieved?

One MDI (Foster® 100/6 µg) was replaced in the formulary by an equivalent DPI (Foster® NEXThaler® 100/6 µg). Distribution numbers are shown below:

– Foster® 100/6 µg: 272 (one year pre adaptation), 4 (one year post adaptation)
– Foster® NEXThaler® 100/6 µg: 150 (one year post adaptation)

By means of this our hospital pharmacy reduced emissions by 2.921,9 kg CO2e compared to preadaptation.

What next?

MDIs containing new propellants with lower GWP are already being worked on by the pharmaceutical industry and thus, more climate friendly opposed to conventional MDIs. Replacing current MDIs with the novel, climate friendly alternatives once available on the market is a useful approach to further lower hospital pharmacies’ carbon emissions.

Pdf

Author(s)

Outi Lapatto-Reiniluoto, Suvi Sivula, Elina Ahomäki

Why was it done?

Price has been the most prominent criteria in procurement quality being the second. Environmental aspects haven’t been assessed earlier. Differences between the pharmaceuticals’ environmental burden can be considerable and by choosing wisely we would be more sustainable.

What was done?

Environmental criteria have not been used in Finland in hospital procurements earlier. We created the criteria which would be acceptable to all parties (hospitals, suppliers), would be reliably assessed, and easily copied to other hospitals.

How was it done?

Our tender had six questions for everyone and two more questions for antibiotics or hormones. The common questions were answered by yes / no / we do not know. Points given were 0, 1, 2. An example of the common question is: Does the company have a plan how to reduce CO2 emissions caused by itself?
Questions for antibiotics and estrogen hormones were: Company has told in which country and in which plant the API is produced and the formulation happens.

What has been achieved?

132 providers answered so far. Quality of answers varied considerably, from 0 to 12 points, mean 7 points. Questions for antibiotics created the most discrepancies: 41 providers; 15 were not able to answer these questions acceptably. The answers showed that the questions were not too difficult, these questions could be answered, and the answers can be analysed.

What next?

The criteria were very simple and assessing the answers was not difficult. Only one question was widely misunderstood. Questions were universal and can be used in other hospitals, too, which is the wish from the industry (same questions everywhere). Wide range of results showed differences between the companies. During this round we did not give any credit for the best products but in the future more responsible products should be rewarded. Antimicrobial resistance e.g., is a global problem but if the company does not know where its products are manufactured how can they look after wastewater treatment of their products.

Pdf

Author(s)

Margaux DUFOSSE, Claire ANDREJAK, Abir PETIT

Why was it done?

By May 2022, we learned about the sale discontinuation of oxygen humidifiers from one of the two manufacturers in our country, due to the constraints of MDR 2017/745. The second manufacturer restricts its products to hospitals with marketing partnerships. In our hospital, oxygen humidifiers are used regardless of the oxygenation medical device (nasal cannulas, masks, tubes or tracheotomy tube) or oxygen flow rate. We had to define indications and prescriptions to control consumption in our hospital.

What was done?

To promote good use of oxygen humidifiers and control our consumption in a context of shortage we have drawn up a scientific explanatory document, a procedure and a prescription support.

How was it done?

We suppressed services’ allocations for humidifiers, to encourage prescription via the Electronic Patient Record. We set up a working group, including pharmacists, resuscitators, pulmonologists and nurses, to write a good use sheet, underlining high-priority medical indications taking account of scientific literature and respiratory medicine learned societies’ recommendations. To assess its effectiveness, we compared humidifiers’ consumption before and after we set it up and evaluate prescriptions’ number and conformity for the first 4 months, from May to September 2022.

What has been achieved?

The group restricted indications to paediatric patients, patients with tracheotomy and patients with oxygen flow rates above 5L/min and upper respiratory tract lesions such as nose bleeding, nasal discharge congestion, or nasal mucosa’s irritation or lesions. We wrote the good use sheet, mentioning the circuit’s montage and conditions for dispensing humidifiers. Before the new procedure, the mean consumption was 1,415 units per month, versus 39 per month from June. Regarding prescriptions’ conformity, 12 (8.7%) out of 138 were denied: six patients on ambient air, four with nasal cannula, one without any severity criteria, a not nominative prescription.

What next?

This collaborative and multidisciplinary work enabled a change in practices. Supply difficulties, initially seen as challenging, are a great opportunity to promote good use, and secure patient care. Although they have now been resolved, with a new supplier, we maintain our measures to ensure patients’ security and well-being.

Pdf

Author(s)

Andrés Sánchez Ruiz, Rocío Contreras Collado, Lucía Gutiérrez Lucena, Juan Jerez Rojas

Why was it done?

The programme began to be developed in March 2020 as an emergency solution to the COVID-19 pandemic, but over time it was refined due to the benefits seen in different areas, especially for pharmacy patients.

What was done?

A hospital drug dispensing programme was created with the collaboration of a community pharmacy and its pharmaceutical distributor. A daily delivery was conducted from the hospital pharmacy, covering the entire province, with a population area of 622,000 inhabitants and an area of 13,500 km2 that includes widely dispersed population centres with complicated communication.

How was it done?

Interlevel collaboration between hospital pharmacy, official college of pharmacists, pharmaceutical distributor and community pharmacy. After the first year, in which the process was more manual and marked by the pace of the pandemic, the programme began to develop. A web application with two-way communication hospital-community pharmacy was created. Hospital Pharmacy reviews and dispenses these requests, with daily shipments to all community pharmacies in the province through the distributor, which ensures safe transportation of the medication with adequate conditions of humidity and temperature.

What has been achieved?

A total of 57,130 dispensations have been made since 2020 (8,089 in 2020, 14,996 in 2021, 16,629 in 2022 and 17,416 in the first half of 2023). Pharmacy Service has dispensed at least once to 5,091 patients. Thanks to the reduction of individual trips (a total of 3,529,022 kms, 52,669 hours travel time, since 2020), it is estimated that the discharge into the atmosphere of 500 tonnes of CO2 in total has been avoided, which is equivalent to the emission of 500 round-trip Spain to Denmark flights (1,000 medium-sized trees are needed for 50 years to absorb that amount of CO2). Eighty-seven percent of private car use was estimated. We did not take into account movements of patients residing in the urban centre of the hospital. The development of ICTs will allow a more clinical approach and an improvement in patient care. We also expect the improvement of the process with the creation of Patient Reported Outcomes (PROs) protocols, already underway for migraine and psoriasis, and Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) protocols.

What next?

The development of ICTs will allow a more clinical approach and an improvement in patient care. We also expect the improvement of the process with the creation of Patient Reportes Outcomes (PROs) protocols, already underway for migraine and psoriasis, and Patient Reported Experience Measures (PREMs) protocols.

Pdf

Author(s)

María Isabel Sáez Rodríguez, Marta Eguiluz Solana, Marta Miranda Magaña

Why was it done?

Shortages are common in our setting. Having a list of critical and must-have drugs (CMHD) specifically designed for our centre allows us to reduce risk of complications due to delays in drugs administration.

What was done?

Monitoring and mitigating potential shortages of critical medicinal products and medical devices by redacting a list of critical pharmacy and health products to have in our centre.

How was it done?

First, we conducted bibliographic research, finding official list of CMHD by FDA, EAHP, and AEMPS.
Afterwards, we crossed those lists with the pharmacotherapeutic guide (PTG) in our centre, identifying those drugs that are considered CMHP, and checking their stock.
Discrepancies between the list provided by official agencies and our PRG were evaluated by the clinical pharmacist, taking into account our centre complexity and surroundings, nearby hospitals and type of patients attended.
With our findings, we redacted a list of CMHP specifically designed for our centre.

What has been achieved?

During our revision, we found discrepancies between our PTG and the official lists of CMHD:
• Some medicines, like certain antidotes, were not considered CMHD. These drugs were included in our list, according to intoxications incidence in our area.
• Lack of stock of must-have products in the official list. Some of them, like coagulation factors, were not considered a CMHD in our centre due to their availability in nearby hospitals. Others, like albendazole, were not included due to low incidence of disease they treated.
Evaluating each drug necessity helped us identify certain health emergencies we may come across in our centre, and prepare for them accordingly. Also, stock revision showed us which medicines have suffered from shortages in the past.
Finally, we achieved our main goal of having a specifically designed list CMHD for our centre.

What next?

Doing a revision of must-have products and adapt it to the centre’s situation enables us to have a better stock control, and serves as a back-up in case of shortages. Our CMHD list must be periodically revised, making sure it adapts to any potential changes in our centre’s situation.

Pdf

Author(s)

Laetitia ALRIC, Isabelle PLOCCO-DESMONTS, Anne-Laure DUBOIS, Sophie TOUQUET-ARNAUD, Kim NGUYEN, Blandine ARMAND, Isabelle HERMELIN, Audrey LEFRANCOIS

Why was it done?

Versatis is a lidocaine patch used in case of post-zona neuralgia. In June 2021, after a note of concern raised by the OMEDIT (Observatoires du MEdicament, des Dispositifs médicaux et de l’Innovation Thérapeutique) regarding its overuse by staff members of the CHRO (Centre Hospitalier Régional d’Orléans).

What was done?

We analysed the change in prescriptions and consumption since the implementation of a Good Practice Form (GPF) in September 2021, concerning Versatis created in collaboration with the CLUD (Comité de LUtte contre la Douleur).

How was it done?

Analysis of nominative dispensations between 09/21 and 02/22.
Consultation of shared electronic patient records.
Medical evaluation of prescriptions by rheumatology and pain-management physicians.
Methodological strategy validated by the physician in charge of professional practices evaluation.

What has been achieved?

Before the implementation, 3839 patches would have been consumed over a 6-month period versus 1541 after, marking a 59.9% decrease.
The population under scrutiny was made up of 106 patients (male-to-female ratio = 1,3; average age = 64 years). The average number of patches delivered per patients was of 15 (min=5; max=160), with 1,1 patches per localisation, for an average length of treatment of 14,4 days. 97 GPF were archived, representing 91,5% of use.
In-label prescriptions (post zona neuralgia with localised allodynia) concerned 14 (13,2%) patients.
Regarding pertinent off-label prescriptions (neuropathic pain with localised allodynia, with a maximum of 1 patch/zone/day): 36% of patients exhibited neuropathic pain, including 9% with allodynia, with 4% 1 patch/zone/day. 9,4% benefited from rheumatological or pain management consultations.
48% of prescriptions respected the 12/24h rest-time, and 79% the limit of 1 patch/zone/day off-label.
After medical expertise, 3 prescriptions were found to be unjustified – 2 due to lack of information and 1 concerning post-gout crisis pain.

What next?

Despite the patch’s small price, the implementation was of significant impact over the hospital’s consumption (and by extension, over the hospital prescribing dispensed in the community), due to its adoption by over 90% of medical prescribers. This, despite a majority of off-label prescriptions, which were rated as pertinent over 90% of the time. The GPF will have been optimised since this evaluation took place, notably with a more precise definition of allodynia.

Pdf

Author(s)

Ariadna Martin Torrente , Itziar Palacios Zabalza, María Olatz Ibarra Barrueta, Maialen Palacios Filardo, Garazi Miron Elorriaga

Why was it done?

To optimise the functioning and the management of the procedures and an accessible and effective communication system in the PS. Moreover, the quality of the shipment is guaranteed all the time. The development of a circuit has allowed being faster and more efficient during its preparation than before.

What was done?

Establishing the circuit of execution, preparation, distribution, and delivery of medicine to Non-Governmental Organisations (NGO) from the Pharmaceutical Service (PS) of a tertiary hospital in the Basque Country (Spain). The circuit has been designed taking into account the criteria in a context of humanitarian donations, published and updated by the Spanish Agency of Drugs and Sanitary Products (AEMPS) on 16 March 2022

How was it done?

Since it has been included in the daily activity of the service it has cause and increase its amount of work, hence, daily routine tasks have been slowed down, given the increase of petitions the hospital has had during last year. However, its creation has allowed being faster and more efficient during its preparation.
The circuit begins with the request of NGO, which has to be authorised by the hospital’s directory. Then, in the procedure participate pharmacists; pharmacy technicians and office clerks who prepare the donation rely on the personalised list that the donation has created. Once, the necessary documents are filled out and they are sent to the AEMPS.

What has been achieved?

From November 2021 to September 2022, 7 donations have been carried out; these contained 100 active ingredients, concretely 15.198 units. We could find most of them in the WHO model lists of essential medicines. The NGO’s destinations have been Guatemala, Romania, Ukraine and Senegal. The medications sent most according to the ATC classification were 21% anti-infective medicines, 17% cardiovascular, 13% nervous system, 12% systemic hormonal preparations and 3% alimentary tract and metabolism.

What next?

The project is easily enforceable in any Spanish PS that is willing to process a donation at any given occasion. Some of our ideas for the future are the creation of a standard list including common medications, avoiding personalised lists, in addition to connect it to our internal programme to be faster when preparing the donation.