SynthesisAnaesthesia2026
Economic evidence for licensed ready-to-administer intravenous products compared with standard vials and ampoules: a systematic review.
Synthesis in Anaesthesia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- We don't make our own toothpaste, so why are we still 'making' so many of our medicines?Anaesthesia · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionInjectable medicines represent a significant proportion of the annual medicines expenditure of the NHS in England, totalling £7 billion ($9.4 billion, €8.0 billion) in 2023. This represents approximately 70% of hospital medicines spending and includes essential treatments delivered at the point of care, such as chemotherapy; clinical trial drugs; and intravenous nutrition. Licensed ready-to-administer injectable products are manufactured and labelled for immediate use, eliminating the need for preparation or dilution by clinical staff, thereby enhancing efficiency and reducing risks. Despite the recognised benefits of ready-to-administer products for safety and productivity, most NHS hospitals favour traditional vials due to lower initial acquisition costs.
methodsWe searched for studies evaluating the clinical or economic impact of ready-to-administer intravenous medications in hospital settings. Grey literature from NHS and UK government sources was also reviewed. Inclusion criteria comprised English language studies assessing cost; waste; preparation time; or medication errors associated with ready-to-administer use.
resultsSixteen studies were included in the review. Ready-to-administer products generally reduced preparation errors, drug wastage and preparation time, but variability in outcome measures and their definitions precluded meta-analysis. Evidence suggesting fewer adverse drug events and workflow interruptions derived mainly from observational studies and surrogate outcomes. Economic evaluations indicated potential savings from avoided errors, reduced waste and staff time, though estimates were context-specific and assumption-dependent. Overall, the risk of bias varied across studies and the predominance of small, single-centre, non-randomised designs limits generalisability. DISCUSSION: Licensed ready-to-administer products are associated with fewer preparation errors, shorter preparation times and reduced drug waste, with plausible economic benefits. The certainty of this conclusion is limited by heterogeneous, largely non-randomised designs and context-specific costs. Evidence specific to the UK is sparse. Multicentre studies with standardised outcomes and robust micro-costing are needed to define clinical impact, budget impact and implementation requirements.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.