Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32434785›Full record

SynthesisEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2021

Automation of in-hospital pharmacy dispensing: a systematic review.

Sarah Batson, Ana Herranz, Nicolas Rohrbach, Michela Canobbio, Stephen A Mitchell, Pascal Bonnabry

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 26 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
26citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
3.7field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

26 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 72 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Impact of Hospital Pharmacy Operation on the Quality of Patient Care.International journal of environmental research and public health · 2023
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.

Sarah BatsonSystematic Review, Mtech Access, Bicester, UK sarah.batson@mtechaccess.co.uk.
Ana HerranzHospital Pharmacy department, Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Maranon, Madrid, Spain.
Nicolas RohrbachBeckton Dickinson Corporation, Grenoble, France.
Michela CanobbioBD Corporation, Milan, Italy.
Stephen A MitchellSystematic Review, Mtech Access, Bicester, UK.
Pascal BonnabryPharmacy, Geneva University Hospitals (HUG), Geneva, Switzerland.ORCID 0000-0002-8690-649X
Kleijnen Systematic Reviews (United Kingdom) · GBBecton Dickinson (France) · FRHospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThe current systematic review (SR) was undertaken to identify and summarise the published literature reporting on the clinical and economic value of automated in-hospital pharmacy services with a primary focus on systems supporting the dispensing of medicines.

methodsLiterature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and the Cochrane Library on 17 December 2017 to identify English-language publications investigating any automated dispensing systems (ADSs) in the inpatient setting to include central pharmacy and ward-based systems.

results4320 publications were screened by title and abstract and 45 of 175 full publications screened were included. Grey literature searching identified an additional three publications. Therefore, 48 publications relating to ADSs were eligible for inclusion. Although a relatively large evidence base was identified as part of the current SR, the eligible studies were inconsistent in terms of their design and the format of reporting of outcomes. The studies demonstrate that both pharmacy and ward-based ADSs offer benefits over traditional manual dispensing methods in terms of clinical and economic outcomes. The primary benefits following implementation of an ADS include reductions in medication errors, medication administration time and costs. Studies examining optimisation/inventory management strategies/refill programmes for these systems suggest that optimal implementation of the ADS is required to ensure that clinical success and economic benefits are maximised.

conclusionsThe published evidence suggests positive impacts of ADS and should encourage hospitals to invest in automation, with a global strategy to improve the reliability and the efficiency of the medication process. However, one of the key findings of the current SR is the need for further data from adequately powered studies reporting clinically relevant outcomes which would allow for robust, evidence-based recommendations on the return on investment of the technologies. These studies would probably contribute to a larger adoption of these technologies by European hospitals.

Indexed as

PharmacyPharmacy Service, HospitalAutomationHospitalsHumansReproducibility of Resultsclinical pharmacydispensing formsdispensing robotshospital pharmacy automationuni dose system

Identifiers

PMID32434785
PMCPMC7907692
OpenAlexW3018585396

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.