| Literature DB >> 33832464 |
María Reyes Abad-Sazatornil1, Ainhoa Arenaza2, Juan Bayo3, Jesus García Mata4, José María Guinea De Castro5, Josefa León6, Javier Letellez7, Virginia Reguero8, Carmen Martínez Chamorro9, Antonio Salar10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subcutaneous (SC) versus intravenous (IV) administration is advantageous in terms of patient convenience and hospital efficiency. This study aimed to compare the effect of optimizing the processes involved in SC versus IV administration of rituximab and trastuzumab on hospital capacity and service quality.Entities:
Keywords: Efficiency indicators; Healthcare capacity; Healthcare quality; Intravenous; Resource optimization; Subcutaneous
Year: 2021 PMID: 33832464 PMCID: PMC8034176 DOI: 10.1186/s12913-021-06277-8
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Health Serv Res ISSN: 1472-6963 Impact factor: 2.655
Fig. 1Participating hospitals
Parameters used to compare the impact of SC vs IV rituximab or trastuzumab administration
| Parameter | Method for calculation |
|---|---|
| 1. Increase treatment administration at the cancer treatment unit due to IV to SC conversion, n (%) | Based on the total time saved with SC and the average time of administration of any drug. ● Total time saved with SC = (Difference in time spent in cancer treatment unit with IV vs SC administration) × (number of patients treated with IV and SC trastuzumab or rituximab) × (no. of visits for IV or SC treatment) ● Average time of administration of any drug [IV and SC trastuzumab, rituximab or other treatment] = based on opening hours, number of positions and volume of daily treatments |
| 2. Increase in treatment administration due to rituximab premedication being administered in waiting room, n (%) | Based on the total time saved in the administration chair and the average time of administration of any drug. ● Total time saved = (Time spent in cancer treatment unit for administration of IV rituximab premedication) × (number of patients treated with rituximab in maintenance) × (no. of visits for rituximab administration) ● Average time of administration of any drug [IV and SC trastuzumab, rituximab or other treatment] = based on opening hours, number of positions and volume of daily treatments |
| 3. Increase in treatments that can be prepared and administered at the reference hospital because patients receiving SC can be treated at hospitals closer to their homes, n (%) | Increase in the number of treatments that can be prepared (based on the total time saved and the average time of preparation of any drug): ● Total time saved with transfer of SC treatment preparation to regional hospital = (Difference in pharmacy preparation time with IV vs SC formulations) × (no. of doses prepared by the regional hospital) ● Average time of preparation of any drug [IV and SC trastuzumab, rituximab or other treatment] = based on opening hours, number of vertical laminar flow hoods and volume of daily treatment preparations Increase in the number of treatments that can be administered (based on the total time saved and the average time of administration of any drug): ● Total time saved by cancer treatment unit with transfer of SC treatment to regional hospital = (Difference in time spent in cancer treatment unit with IV vs SC administration) × (no. of patients referred to regional hospital for treatment) × (no. of visits for IV or SC treatment) ● Average time of administration of any drug [IV and SC trastuzumab, rituximab or other treatment] = based on opening hours, number of positions and volume of daily treatments |
| 4. Increase in treatments that can be prepared in the vertical laminar flow hood at the hospital pharmacy, n (%) | Based on the total time saved due to the reduction in preparation times with SC or since SC formulation can be prepared at the cancer treatment unit and the average time of preparation of any drug. ● Time saved in the hospital pharmacy = (Difference in time spent preparing IV formulation in the vertical laminar flow hood vs preparing SC doses) × (no. of doses prepared) ● Average time of preparation of any drug [IV and SC trastuzumab, rituximab or other treatment] = based on opening hours, number of vertical laminar flow hoods and volume of daily treatment preparations |
| 1. Reduction in time spent in hospital (SC vs IV), minutes | ● Reduction in time spent in hospital = [(Average medical consultation time for IV treatment) – (average medical consultation time for SC treatment)] + [(average wait time to receive IV treatment) – (average wait time to receive SC treatment)] + [(average time spent in the cancer treatment unit with IV administration) – (average time spent in the cancer treatment unit with SC administration)] |
| 2. Improvement in caregiver’s and/or patient’s work productivity, € (%) | ● Improvement in labor productivity (assessed by economic- and time-related measures) = (Reduction in time spent in hospital [from row above]) × (average cost of professional per minute [estimated at 0.205464 €/min])a |
| 3. Reduction in the use rate and time of venous access devices with reservoirs, n (%) | ● (No. of patients requiring a venous access device with a reservoir [port a cath] during IV maintenance treatment) – (no. of patients carrying a venous access device [PICC] during SC maintenance treatment) ● Reduction in time using a venous access device, as PICC requires less time than port-a-cath |
aDerived from Spanish labor market statistics [23], where the average annual gross salary is €23,022.20, and working hours of 155.6 h per month
IV intravenous, PICC peripherally inserted central catheter, SC subcutaneous
Estimated time required per month to administer rituximab or trastuzumab subcutaneously or intravenously
| Average time, min | Waiting room | Administration chair | Medical consultation | Total | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| IV | SC | IV | SC | IV | SC | IV | SC | |
| Per cycle in combination with chemotherapy | 71 | 71 | 296 | 139 | 20 | 20 | 387 | 230 |
| Per maintenance treatment cycle | 68 | 53 | 183 | 21 | 16 | 15 | 267 | 89 |
| First cycle (including loading dose) in combination with chemotherapyb | 83 | 83 | 187 | 83 | 17 | 16 | 286 | 181 |
| Per cycle in combination with chemotherapy (without loading dose) | 85 | 85 | 162 | 107 | 17 | 16 | 264 | 208 |
| Per maintenance treatment cycle | 85 | 60 | 64 | 15 | 17 | 16 | 166 | 91 |
aThe weighted average total time per patient per month was estimated by dividing the total treatment time in a year by 12 months. Total treatment pattern in a year differs per approved indication as follows: (1) First-line follicular lymphoma (48% of patients treated with rituximab): 8 cycles in combination with chemotherapy (the first one always IV) and the last 12 as maintenance therapy; (2) Relapsed refractory follicular lymphoma (14% of patients treated with rituximab): 8 cycles in combination with chemotherapy (the first one always IV) and the last 8 as maintenance therapy; (3) Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (38% of patients): 8 cycles in combination with chemotherapy (the first one always IV)
bData for the first trastuzumab cycle (i.e. that including the loading dose) were missing from three hospitals, so the average times shown are from six of the nine hospitals
cThe average total time per patient per month was estimated by first calculating the total treatment time in a year, consisting of a first cycle with loading dose in combination with chemotherapy, 7 subsequent cycles in combination with chemotherapy, and 10 cycles of maintenance therapy (giving a total of 18 cycles/year), and then dividing by 12 months
IV intravenous, SC subcutaneous
Fig. 2Reduction of time in the hospital as a result of conversion of (a) trastuzumab and (b) rituximab from IV to SC administration, and as a result of hypothetical maximum conversion of (c) trastuzumab and (d) rituximab from IV to SC administration. IV intravenous, SC subcutaneous
Estimated caregiver productivity increase with subcutaneous versus intravenous monoclonal antibodies administration
| Under current conditions | Subcutaneous in all eligible patientsa | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Rituximab | Trastuzumab | Rituximab | Trastuzumab | |
| In combination with chemotherapy | 19.2% | 9.9% | 39.4% | 22.5% |
| As maintenance therapy | 17.0% | 34.7% | 22.9% | 41.4% |
| Averageb | 21.2% | 32.5% | ||
aAssuming a complete conversion to SC formulations according to the approved SmPC (45% of rituximab treatments and 91% of trastuzumab treatments)
bBased on the following assumptions: (1) the first dose of rituximab is administered IV in all patients; (2) 48% of the total number of patients have first-line follicular lymphoma and receive 8 cycles of rituximab in combination with chemotherapy and 12 as maintenance therapy, (3) 14% of the total number of patients have relapsed refractory follicular lymphoma and receive 8 cycles of rituximab in combination with chemotherapy and 8 as maintenance therapy, (4) 38% of the total number of patients have diffuse large B-cell lymphoma and receive 8 cycles of rituximab in combination with chemotherapy; (5) trastuzumab is given as first cycle loading dose in combination with chemotherapy, 7 subsequent cycles in combination with chemotherapy, and 10 cycles in maintenance therapy; a total of 18 cycles/year
SC subcutaneous, SmPC summary of product characteristics
Change in care capacity and quality assuming maximum SC administration efficiency and use
| Parameter | Percent change in parameter |
|---|---|
| 1. Increase in treatments administered at the cancer treatment unit due to conversion from IV to SC | + 5.75% |
| 2. Increase in treatments administered due to rituximab premedication being administered in the waiting room | + 0.40% |
| 3. Increase in treatments that can be prepared and administered at the reference hospital because patients receiving SC can be treated at hospitals closer to their homes | + 2.80% |
| 4. Increase in treatments that can be prepared in the laminar flow hood at the hospital pharmacy: | |
| a. Due to conversion of IV to SC formulation | + 12.16% |
| b. Due to preparation of SC formulations at the cancer treatment unit | + 14.10% |
| 1. Reduction in time spent in hospital: | |
| a. For trastuzumab treatment | −60% |
| b. For rituximab treatment | −66% |
| 2. Improvement in caregiver’s and/or patient’s work productivity | + 32.5% |
IV intravenous, SC subcutaneous