OBJECTIVES: To identify the intravenous (IV) medications that are prepared in glass bottles at the institution and establish which of these medications can be prepared in flexible IV bags such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or non-PVC instead of glass bottles. The cost implication of switching from glass bottles to flexible IV bags was calculated. METHODS: A study using FOCUS-PDCA model to identify IV medications prepared in glass bottles and establish which of these medications could be prepared in IV bags (PVC or non-PVC). The cost impact of switching from glass bottles to IV plastic bags (including PVC or non-PVC) was calculated. The stability data obtained were used as a reference for updating pharmacy internal IV preparation charts. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 17 IV medications were found to be prepared in IV glass bottles. Of these 17 medications, only 8 (47%) were prepared in IV glass bottles due to incompatibility with PVC bags. For 7 (41%) of the medications, of which 6 were monoclonal antibodies (MABs), the reason for preparation in glass bottles was unclear as these medications are compatible with either PVC or non-PVC or both. The potential cost savings associated with switching all of the identified medications to IV plastic bags (either non-PVC or PVC) exceeded $200 000. CONCLUSIONS: The elimination of glass bottles within the institution resulted in a significant cost saving. The use of FOCUS-PDCA model can help healthcare institution achieve significant improvements in process and realize significant cost savings.
OBJECTIVES: To identify the intravenous (IV) medications that are prepared in glass bottles at the institution and establish which of these medications can be prepared in flexible IV bags such as polyvinyl chloride (PVC) or non-PVC instead of glass bottles. The cost implication of switching from glass bottles to flexible IV bags was calculated. METHODS: A study using FOCUS-PDCA model to identify IV medications prepared in glass bottles and establish which of these medications could be prepared in IV bags (PVC or non-PVC). The cost impact of switching from glass bottles to IV plastic bags (including PVC or non-PVC) was calculated. The stability data obtained were used as a reference for updating pharmacy internal IV preparation charts. KEY FINDINGS: A total of 17 IV medications were found to be prepared in IV glass bottles. Of these 17 medications, only 8 (47%) were prepared in IV glass bottles due to incompatibility with PVC bags. For 7 (41%) of the medications, of which 6 were monoclonal antibodies (MABs), the reason for preparation in glass bottles was unclear as these medications are compatible with either PVC or non-PVC or both. The potential cost savings associated with switching all of the identified medications to IV plastic bags (either non-PVC or PVC) exceeded $200 000. CONCLUSIONS: The elimination of glass bottles within the institution resulted in a significant cost saving. The use of FOCUS-PDCA model can help healthcare institution achieve significant improvements in process and realize significant cost savings.