Medication errors can be virtually eliminated by use of all of the following technologies except

Improving patient safety is always a key focus in the hospital setting, and pharmacists have been exploring a variety of strategies and technologies to achieve this goal. Automated dispensing machines—decentralized medication distribution systems that provide computer-controlled storage, dispensing, and tracking of medications—have been recommended as one potential mechanism to improve efficiency and patient safety, and they are now widely used in many hospitals.1 There is no doubt that these machines can enhance the efficiency of medication distribution, but their capacity to reduce medication errors is controversial and depends on many factors, including how users design and implement the systems.2 Still, we are confident in providing the following reasons and experiences to support our position that automated dispensing machines improve patient safety.

Before the implementation of unit-based automated dispensing machines in 1995, the hospitals within the University Health Network in Toronto, Ontario, relied heavily on manual distribution systems, including traditional floor stock and medication carts, which held a 24-h supply (or, at Princess Margaret Hospital, a 10-day supply) of patient-specific medications in individual patient cassettes. A floor stock system is flexible, but the pharmacy has little control over inventory. Although the 24-h unit-dose cart exchange offers tighter inventory control, it is often regarded as an inefficient drug distribution system.3 In addition to being labour-intensive, other major concerns with these carts include delays in delivery of the first dose, loss of doses, and “borrowing” of patients’ medications.4 In contrast, automated dispensing machines provide a good balance among security, accessibility, and inventory control of medications, which are all recognized as important characteristics of a safe medication distribution system.

Automated dispensing machines provide secure medication storage on patient care units, along with electronic tracking of the use of narcotics and other controlled drugs.2 Reports can be generated to help identify and prevent potential diversion. Automated dispensing machines save nursing time by eliminating the need for manual end-of-shift narcotic counts in patient care units. Before 2004, large quantities of floor stock were available in the operating rooms at Toronto General Hospital, with narcotics and other controlled drugs being stocked manually in a double-locked cabinet. This system was prone to many problems, including under- or over-stocking of inventory, missing or inaccurate drug charges, no tracking of drugs and drug waste, and complicated manual documentation procedures for narcotics and other controlled drugs. To improve efficiency and control of narcotics and other medications in the operating suite, a system of automated dispensing machines was implemented, in conjunction with a 24-h exchange program for anesthesia trays.5 This project began in early 2003 and was completed in May 2004. Every anesthetist has now completed the required training and is accountable for using this cabinet for the removal and return of narcotics and controlled drugs to be administered during surgery. The goal of maximizing patient safety has been achieved through the choice of automated dispensing machines with mini-drawers, which open only when a specific medication is selected and which limit access to the selected quantities.

Another clinical feature of automated dispensing machines is the capability to track and proactively monitor drug usage patterns. This is accomplished by setting up clinical indicators during removal of specified drugs. One example of this approach involved aprotinin, a medication that is administered by injection to reduce bleeding and to decrease the need for blood transfusions during complex surgery. This drug is expensive, and there are restrictions on its use; it was therefore deemed suitable for testing the use of clinical indicators. During the test period, physicians were asked to select the specific indication for use, by on-screen prompting, whenever they removed aprotinin from the automated dispensing machines. The reporting capabilities of the machines allowed pharmacy staff to regularly track and monitor the appropriateness of aprotinin use, and the results of tracking were reported back to the physicians. This process reduced inappropriate use by more than 50%. Similar processes for enhancing patient safety by enforcing appropriate utilization can be set up for any high-risk drug.

Automated dispensing machines enhance first-dose availability and facilitate the timely administration of medications by increasing their accessibility on patient care units. This benefit is particularly important in emergency departments and intensive care units, where most hospitals still use a floor stock system because of frequent dose changes and need for immediate access. There is increasing recognition of the complexity of medication use in both of these areas and the high potential for serious medication errors.6 Automated dispensing machines allow physicians to treat critically ill patients efficiently by providing convenient access to medications for emergency situations during and after pharmacy hours. In addition, the single-access drawer feature of automated dispensing machines offers tighter control by allowing access to just one medication at a time for medications with high potential for mix-up (e.g., those with look-alike or sound-alike names), as identified by the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP).7

Automated dispensing machines eliminate the dispensing of unused “as-needed” (prn) doses, thereby decreasing the potential for administration errors that can arise if more doses than needed are dispensed and available for administration. Because Princess Margaret Hospital is a specialized oncology hospital, antiemetics and analgesics are often prescribed on an as-needed basis, in multiple dosage forms for various routes of administration. These drugs represent a high percentage (more than 40%) of orders for as-needed medications for oncology patients. Such therapies are changed frequently to achieve optimal symptom control. Doses that have been administered are tracked within the patient’s profile in the automated dispensing machines, allowing pharmacists access to real-time, up-to-date data about administered medications. This information is crucial in modifying therapy and enhancing patient safety. The automated dispensing machines in inpatient units, including ICUs, are interfaced with the pharmacy computer and hence support clinical review of medication orders by a pharmacist before administration, without impeding the timeliness of dosing. The combination of timely and accurate dosing with review by a pharmacist is another aspect of patient safety.2,8

Finally, from a workload perspective, automated dispensing machines reduce pharmacists’ dispensing time, as inventory management is driven by the pre-established minimum and maximum levels and is handled exclusively by pharmacy technicians.6,9 Hence, pharmacists have more time to dedicate to direct patient care activities and patient safety initiatives.

In this age of technological advances, automated dispensing machines have certainly met our requirements for an efficient medication distribution system. When cabinet design and use are carefully planned and the cabinets are utilized to their full potential, the implementation of automated dispensing machines is a step toward greater patient safety.

1. Guidance on the interdisciplinary safe use of automated dispensing cabinets Horsham (PA)Institute for Safe Medication Practices; 2008[cited 2009 Sep 8]. Available from: http://www.ismp.org/Tools/guidelines/ADC_Guidelines_Final.pdf [Google Scholar]

2. Follow ISMP guidelines to safeguard the design and use of automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) ISMP Med Saf Alert. 2009;7(4):1–2. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Ray MD, Aldrich LT, Lew PJ. Experience with an automated point-of-use unit-dose drug distribution system. Hosp Pharm. 1995;30(1):18, 20–23, 27–30. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

4. Oren E, Shaffer ER, Guglielmo BJ. Impact of emerging technologies on medication errors and adverse drug events. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2003;60(14):1447–1458. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

5. Fung E.Implementing a drug distribution system in a 22-suite operating room [poster presentation]ASHP Leadership Summer Meeting; 2006 Jun [cited 2009 Sep 8]; Orlando (FL). Available from: http://www.pppmag.com/documents/V3N6/WDIToT_Pg32.pdf

6. Pedersen CA, Schneider PJ, Scheckelhoff DJ. ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: dispensing and administration—2005. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2006;63(4):327–345. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. ISMP’s list of confused drug names Institute for Safe Medication Practices; 2009 [cited 2009 Sep 8]. Available from: http://www.ismp.org/tools/confuseddrugnames.pdf

8. Bates WD. Using information technology to reduce rates of medication errors in hospital. BMJ. 2000;320(7237):788–791. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Hansen R.Product spotlight: automated dispensing cabinets from medDISPENSE Pharm Purch Prod 2007December[cited 2009 Sep 9];:10. Available from: http://www.pppmag.com/documents/V4N12/p10.pdf