Evaluation of an Automated Dispensing Cabinet in Paediatric Intensive Care – Focus on Controlled Medications
Open accessAbstract
Evidence is limited of automated dispensing cabinets (ADCs) impact on effectiveness and efficiency of controlled drugs’ (CDs) governance processes. We carried out a mixed-methods study of an ADC in an intensive care unit. We found ADC improved effectiveness and efficiency of governance of CDs through secure storage, alerts and automated recording of transactions. Limitations were associated with ADC design and ‘fit’ between ADC and some types of CDs.
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?
CD discrepancies were reported to be easily identified by nurses.
“CD discrepancies were also reported to be easily identified by nurses.36”
From Benefits and challenges associated with implementation and ongoing use of automated dispensing cabinet for medicines: A scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [36]
The Results report that discrepancies in ADC-recorded stock were identified in or near real time, for example through alerts. They do not say that nurses reported finding discrepancies easy to identify; the nurses’ reported experience concerns faster daily stock counts. The claim captures improved detection but attributes an ease-of-identification report to nurses that our copy does not support. (LLM, conf=0.82)
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
Still being checked.
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Ahtiainen HK, Kallio MM, Airaksinen M, Holmström A-R. Safety, time and cost evaluation of automated and semi-automated drug distribution systems in hospitals: a systematic review. European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy (2019), ejhpharm-2018-001791.
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
“36 The time taken for nurses to undertake CD counts was perceived to have reduced significantly, however, this was not quantified.”
- Authors
- Lichtner, V., Prgomet, M., Gates, P., Franklin, B. D., & Westbrook, J. I.
- Affiliations
- UCL School of Pharmacy (GB)
- Macquarie University (AU)
- Imperial College Healthcare NHS Trust (GB)
- Venue
- Studies in Health Technology and Informatics
- Publisher
- IOS Press
- Published
- 2021-12-15
- Volume
- 284
- Pages
- 323-325
- ISSN
- 0926-9630 (ISSN-L)
- 1879-8365
- OpenAlex
- W4200061634
- Cited by
- 1
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1
- FWCI
- 0.00
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Licence
- Locations
- Studies in health technology and informatics (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Health Information Management › Electronic Health Records Systems
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
- Keywords
- automated dispensing cabinets, controlled substances, pediatric intensive care, medication alerts, drug safety
- MeSH terms
- Child, Critical Care, Humans
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
