Economic Evaluation of Using a Unit Dose Dispensing Robot in a Thai Tertiary Hospital
Author(s)
Vittanee Getupook, B.Sc.1, Supichaya Klubfang, B.Sc.2, Monchaya Atthapuk, B.Sc.2, Attaya Plangsanguan, B.Sc.1, Manchuporn Yomsiri, B.Sc.1, Parnnaphat Luksameesate, PhD2.
1Department of Pharmaceutical, Nopparat Rajathanee Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, 2Department of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
1Department of Pharmaceutical, Nopparat Rajathanee Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand, 2Department of Social and Administrative Pharmacy, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.
Presentation Documents
OBJECTIVES: Medication errors can lead to severe outcomes, including adverse drug events and even death. As a result, many hospitals are adopting technologies like the Unit Dose Dispensing Robot (UDRs) to reduce these incidents. However, there has been no research in Thailand regarding the costs and medication errors related to UDRs. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the cost-effectiveness of UDRs compared to manual dispensing in Thailand.
METHODS: Cost and outcome data were collected from a tertiary care hospital database between 2017 and 2022, covering a six-year period. The assessed outcome was the medication error rates before and after UDR adoption. Costs included labor, materials, and capital costs. The cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) evaluated the incremental cost per medication error avoided. A one-way sensitivity analysis examined how changes in individual parameters impacted the overall results.
RESULTS: The UDRs prevented 269.90 medication errors annually at a total cost of 64,883 United States dollars, leading to an ICER of 240.40 United States dollars for each medication error avoided. Furthermore, the one-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost of medication following the introduction of a UDRs exhibited the highest variance among the variables.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that implementing UDRs was more costly but effectively reduced medication errors. Therefore, adopting UDRs represents a worthwhile investment to enhance patient safety and enhance hospital medication dispensing efficiency.
METHODS: Cost and outcome data were collected from a tertiary care hospital database between 2017 and 2022, covering a six-year period. The assessed outcome was the medication error rates before and after UDR adoption. Costs included labor, materials, and capital costs. The cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) evaluated the incremental cost per medication error avoided. A one-way sensitivity analysis examined how changes in individual parameters impacted the overall results.
RESULTS: The UDRs prevented 269.90 medication errors annually at a total cost of 64,883 United States dollars, leading to an ICER of 240.40 United States dollars for each medication error avoided. Furthermore, the one-way sensitivity analysis revealed that the cost of medication following the introduction of a UDRs exhibited the highest variance among the variables.
CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that implementing UDRs was more costly but effectively reduced medication errors. Therefore, adopting UDRs represents a worthwhile investment to enhance patient safety and enhance hospital medication dispensing efficiency.
Conference/Value in Health Info
2025-09, ISPOR Real-World Evidence Summit 2025, Tokyo, Japan
Value in Health Regional, Volume 49S (September 2025)
Code
RWD274
Topic Subcategory
Health & Insurance Records Systems
Disease
No Additional Disease & Conditions/Specialized Treatment Areas