1887
Volume 2022 Number 1
  • ISSN: 1999-7086
  • EISSN: 1999-7094

Abstract

Insulin therapy is commonly used to control hyperglycemia in hospitalized diabetic patients. There are different delivery devices of Aspart and Glargine insulin which are available in 1000 IU vial and 300 IU Flexpen. As per the manufacturer's recommendations, insulin pre-filled pens are designed for single patient use only, whereas the vial form is intended for multidose administration for different patients, therefore, the selection amongst both forms of insulin will certainly impact the consumption cost. According to our observation, there was an unjustified prescribing discrepancy between both forms. Several studies have shown a decrease in insulin wastage associated reduction in acquisition costs when switching from pre-filled pens to vials1-3. This is a quality improvement project that aims to enhance prescribing insulin vials in acute medical units at Hamad General Hospital. Insulin consumption data were retrospectively reviewed between July 2020-May 2021. Data were obtained 3 months consecutively at baseline and post improvement interventions which consist of 2 steps. Step 1: educating physicians and nurses about the cost effectiveness of insulin delivery devices, and Step 2: Transitioning patients from insulin Flexpen to vials by an authorized pharmacist. The outcomes measures were related to insulin consumption and cost reduction. The process was measured by the amount of Flexpens dispensed. From July-October 2020, 400 patients consumed 81500 IU of insulin Aspart and 58600 IU of insulin Glargine, with a total number of 297 Flexpens used. After implementing improvement intervention, insulin consumption for 551 patients from February – May 2021 reduced to 19200 IU (76.4%) for Aspart and 18900 IU (67.7%) Glargine (Figure 1), comparing with same interval period only 38 Flexpens were dispensed. Economically, the transition to insulin vials reduced the hospital cost by 71% (Table 1). Compared to Flexpen, insulin vial prescribing in hospitalized diabetic patients led to waste and cost consumption reduction of insulin.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2022.qhc.40
2021-11-28
2022-09-28
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/jemtac/2022/1/jemtac.2022.qhc.40.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2022.qhc.40&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Kelton KA, Perk S, Loveland S, Perez-Nieves M, Fu H, Peng X. Economic outcomes with the conversion of insulin delivery methods in hospitals. J Med Econ. 2017 May; 20:(5):533–540. Available from: doi:10.1080/13696998.2017.1288126.
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cameron CG, Bennett HA. Cost-effectiveness of insulin analogues for diabetes mellitus. CMAJ. 2009; 180:(4):400–407. Available from: doi:10.1503/cmaj.081180.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Eby EL, Smolen LJ, Pitts AC, Krueger LA, Andrews JS. Comparison of vials and prefilled pens of a rapid-acting insulin analog on pharmacy budgets in a long-term care setting. Consult Pharm. 2014 Dec; 29:(12):813–822. Available from: doi:10.4140/TCP.n.2014.813.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2022.qhc.40
Loading
/content/journals/10.5339/jemtac.2022.qhc.40
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Conference Abstract
Keyword(s): Diabetes mellitusEconomic impactHamad General HospitalInsulin pre-filled pen and Insulin vial

Most Cited This Month Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error