Automated drug dispensing systems in the intensive care unit: a financial analysis
Open accessAbstract
Introduction: To evaluate the economic impact of automated-drug dispensing systems (ADS) in surgical intensive care units (ICUs). A financial analysis was conducted in three adult ICUs of one university hospital, where ADS were implemented, one in each unit, to replace the traditional floor stock system. Method: Costs were estimated before and after implementation of the ADS on the basis of floor stock inventories, expired drugs, and time spent by nurses and pharmacy technicians on medication-related work activities. A financial analysis was conducted that included operating cash flows, investment cash flows, global cash flow and net present value. Results: After ADS implementation, nurses spent less time on medication-related activities with an average of 14.7 hours saved per day/33 beds. Pharmacy technicians spent more time on floor-stock activities with an average of 3.5 additional hours per day across the three ICUs. The cost of drug storage was reduced by €44,298 and the cost of expired drugs was reduced by €14,772 per year across the three ICUs. Five years after the initial investment, the global cash flow was €148,229 and the net present value of the project was positive by €510,404. Conclusion: The financial modeling of the ADS implementation in three ICUs showed a high return on investment for the hospital. Medication-related costs and nursing time dedicated to medications are reduced with ADS.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
ADC implementation is associated with reduced nursing time dedicated to selecting, preparing, and administering medication, with a mean time gain of 14.7 h per day across three intensive care units (4 h/9 beds) as reported by Chapuis et al.
“Chapuis et al. described that nursing time dedicated to selecting, preparing, and administering medication reduced post-ADC implementation with a mean time gain of 14.7 h per day across three intensive care units (ICUs) (4 h/9 beds).19”
From Benefits and challenges associated with implementation and ongoing use of automated dispensing cabinet for medicines: A scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
The Results report a mean nursing time gain of 14.7 hours per day across three ICUs (4 hours per 9 beds), including less time collecting and preparing medications. The Methods list the medication-related activities assessed, but do not include administering medication; that part of the citing sentence is unsupported. (LLM, conf=0.87)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredBenefits in cost saving were observed from reduced ward stock supply and annual spend on expired medicines, decreased stockouts, and decreased stock orders from central pharmacy.
“Benefits in cost saving were observed from reduced ward stock supply and annual spend on expired medicines, decreased stockouts, and decreased stock orders from central pharmacy [8,9,19,37,38,56,63].”
From Benefits and challenges associated with implementation and ongoing use of automated dispensing cabinet for medicines: A scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [19]
The Abstract Results report lower drug-storage costs and annual costs for expired drugs; the Results report fewer missing medications (84 to 37). The Results also show less nursing time spent ordering and stocking medications, but do not establish that the number of stock orders from central pharmacy decreased or that fewer missing medications produced measured cost savings. The supplied copy gives no page numbers for these passages. (LLM, conf=0.86)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 17
- [1]Lee LW Wellman GS Birdwell SW Sherrin TP Use of an automated medication storage and distribution system Am J Hosp Pharm 1992 49 851 5 1595721
- [2]Kane-Gill SL Kirisci L Verrico MM Rothschild JM Analysis of risk factors for adverse drug events in critically ill patients Crit Care Med 2012 40 823 8 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318236f473 22036859 PMC3581340 · DOI
- [3]Moyen E Camiré E Stelfox HT Clinical review: medication errors in critical care Crit Care 2008 12 208 10.1186/cc6813 18373883 PMC2447555 · DOI
- [4]Bates DW Spell N Cullen DJ Burdick E Laird N Petersen LA The costs of adverse drug events in hospitalized patients. Adverse Drug Events Prevention Study Group JAMA 1997 277 307 11 10.1001/jama.1997.03540280045032 9002493 · DOI
- [5]Schwarz HO Brodowy BA Implementation and evaluation of an automated dispensing system Am J Health Syst Pharm 1995 52 823 8 7634117
- [6]Guerrero RM Nickman NA Jorgenson JA Work activities before and after implementation of an automated dispensing system Am J Health Syst Pharm 1996 53 548 54 8697015
- [7]Wise LC Bostrom J Crosier JA White S Caldwell R Cost-benefit analysis of an automated medication system Nurs Econ 1996 14 224 31 8826310
- [9]Tsao NW Lo C Babich M Shah K Bansback NJ Decentralized automated dispensing devices: systematic review of clinical and economic impacts in hospitals CJHP 2014 67 138 48 10.4212/cjhp.v67i2.1343 PMC4006759 24799724 · DOI · Paper page
- [10]Pedersen CA Schneider PJ Scheckelhoff DJ ASHP national survey of pharmacy practice in hospital settings: dispensing and administration-2011 Am J Health Syst Pharm 2012 69 768 85 10.2146/ajhp110735 22517022 · DOI
- [11]Chapuis C Roustit M Bal G Schwebel C Pansu P David-Tchouda S Automated drug dispensing system reduces medication errors in an intensive care setting Crit Care Med 2010 38 2275 81 10.1097/CCM.0b013e3181f8569b 20838333 · DOI
- [12]Vernimmen P Quiry P Le Fur Y Dallocchio M Salvi A Corporate Finance: Theory and Practice 2009 2 New York John Wiley & Sons Ltd
- [14]Camiré E Moyen E Stelfox HT Medication errors in critical care: risk factors, prevention and disclosure CMAJ 2009 180 936 43 10.1503/cmaj.080869 19398740 PMC2670906 · DOI
- [15]Colpaert K Claus B Somers A Vandewoude K Robays H Decruyenaere J Impact of computerized physician order entry on medication prescription errors in the intensive care unit: a controlled cross-sectional trial Crit Care 2006 10 R21 10.1186/cc3983 16469126 PMC1550814 · DOI
- [16]Novek J Bettess S Burke K Johnston P Nurses’ perceptions of the reliability of an automated medication dispensing system J Nurs Care Qual 2000 14 1 13 10.1097/00001786-200001000-00003 10646296 · DOI
- [17]Klopotowska JE Kuiper R van Kan HJ de Pont AC Dijkgraaf MG Lie-A-Huen L On-ward participation of a hospital pharmacist in a Dutch intensive care unit reduces prescribing errors and related patient harm: an intervention study Crit Care 2010 14 R174 10.1186/cc9278 20920322 PMC3219276 · DOI
- [18]Preslaski CR Lat I MacLaren R Poston J Pharmacist contributions as members of the multidisciplinary ICU Team Chest 2013 144 1687 95 10.1378/chest.12-1615 24189862 · DOI
- [19]Brilli RJ Spevetz A Branson RD Campbell GM Cohen H Dasta JF Critical care delivery in the intensive care unit: defining clinical roles and the best practice model Crit Care Med 2001 29 2007 19 10.1097/00003246-200110000-00026 11588472 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jung, Y. Y., Walsh, Á., Patel, J., & Lai, K. (2025) · Exploratory Research in Clinical and Social Pharmacy · doi:10.1016/j.rcsop.2025.100599 · Cited by 7 · see citing works
“19 This observation was supported by other publications, 15,19,20,23,35,39 where Cottney et al. described 66 min of time saving associated with medicines administration per ward per day by nurses (2.94 min pre-ADC to 2.37 min post-ADC).”
Influential
- Authors
- Chapuis, C., Bedouch, P., Detavernier, M., Durand, M., Francony, G., Lavagne, P., Foroni, L., Albaladejo, P., Allenet, B., & Payen, J.-F.
- Affiliations
- Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Grenoble (FR)
- Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR)
- Hôpital Albert Michallon (FR)
- Corresponding author
- Chapuis, Claire
- Venue
- Critical Care
- Published
- 2015-12
- Volume
- 19
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 318-318
- ISSN
- 1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4563942
- OpenAlex
- W1797844472
- Cited by
- 49
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 3 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 6 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4
- FWCI
- 5.64
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Critical Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion)
- Funders
- non (non)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Healthcare Operations and Scheduling Optimization
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
- Keywords
- intensive care unit, expired medicines, nursing time, pharmacy technicians, drug costs, hospital financial analysis, return on investment
- MeSH terms
- Automation, Cost-Benefit Analysis, Hospitals, University, Humans, Intensive Care Units, Medication Systems, Hospital, Cost Savings, Hospital Costs
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
