Decentralized Automated Dispensing Devices: Systematic Review of Clinical and Economic Impacts in Hospitals
Open accessAbstract
Background: Technologies have been developed over the past 20 years to automate the stages of drug distribution in hospitals, including ordering, dispensing, delivery, and administration of medications, in attempts to decrease medication error rates. Decentralized automated dispensing devices (ADDs) represent one such technology that is being adopted by hospitals across Canada, but the touted benefits, in terms of improved patient safety and cost savings, are increasingly being questioned.Objective: To summarize and evaluate the existing literature reporting the clinical and economic impacts of using decentralized ADDs in hospitals.Data Sources: A literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and all evidence-based medicine databases for the years 1992 to 2012 to identify English-language articles reporting on the use of ADDs in hospital wards. Study Selection and Data Extraction: All randomized controlled trials, observational studies, before-and-after studies, time series analyses, cost-effectiveness and cost–benefit analyses, and review articles were considered for inclusion. Studies evaluating pharmacy-based ADDs, such as bar code–based medication dispensing carousels, automated dispensing shelves, and combinations of various dispensing modalities, were excluded.Data Synthesis: Of 175 studies initially identified, 8 were retained for evidence synthesis. It appears that ADDs were effective in reducing medication storage errors and the time that nurses spent taking inventory of narcotics and controlled substances. There was no definitive evidence that using ADDs increased the time that nurses or pharmacists spent with patients, reduced medication errors resulting in patient harm, or reduced costs in Canadian hospitals. However, pharmacy technicians spent more time stocking the machines.Conclusion: ADDs have limited potential to decrease medication errors and increase efficiencies, but their impact is highly institution-specific, and use of this technology requires proper integration into an institution’s medication distribution process. Before deploying this technology, it is recommended that Canadian hospitals carefully examine their current systems and the benefits they hope to gain with the changes. RÉSUMÉContexte : Au cours des vingt dernières années, des technologies ont été développées afin d’automatiser les étapes de la distribution des médicaments dans les hôpitaux, notamment pour ce qui est de l’émission d’ordonnances et de la dispensation, de la délivrance et de l’administration des médicaments, le tout dans le but de réduire le nombre d’erreurs de médication. Les cabinets automatisés décentralisés (CAD) font partie de ces technologies qui sont adoptées par les hôpitaux du Canada, mais leurs bienfaits très publicisés, en ce qui a trait à l’amélioration de la sécurité des patients et aux économies pouvant être réalisées, sont de plus en plus remis en question.Objectif : Résumer et évaluer la littérature faisant état des retombées cliniques et économiques de l’utilisation de CAD dans les hôpitaux. Sources des données : Une recherche documentaire a été effectuée dans MEDLINE, Embase ainsi que dans l’ensemble des bases de données médicales fondées sur des preuves pour la période allant de 1992 à 2012 afin de trouver les articles rédigés en anglais qui font état de l’utilisation des CAD dans les services d’hôpitaux.Sélection des études et extraction des données : Cette revue a pris en considération toutes les études cliniques aléatoires, les études observationnelles, les études avant-après, les analyses de séries chronologiques, les analyses coût-avantage et coût-efficacité, et les articles de synthèse. Les études évaluant les CAD en usage dans les pharmacies, robots parmi lesquels on compte les carrousels de distribution de médicaments utilisant des codes-barres, les rayonnages de distribution automatisés et les combinaisons de différents moyens de distribution, n’ont pas été retenues.Synthèse des données : Des 175 études d’abord recensées, huit ont été retenues pour la synthèse des données probantes. Les CAD semblent avoir été utiles pour réduire le nombre d’erreurs d’entreposage de médicaments ainsi que le temps nécessaire au personnel infirmier pour faire l’inventaire des narcotiques et des substances contrôlées. Aucune donnée probante ne permet d’affirmer que le temps passé par le personnel infirmier et les pharmaciens auprès des patients a augmenté, que le nombre d’erreurs de médication causant du tort aux patients a baissé ou que les coûts des hôpitaux canadiens ont chuté grâce à l’utilisation des CAD. Par contre, les techniciens en pharmacie ont passé plus de temps à remplir les machines.Conclusion : Les CAD présentent un faible potentiel de réduction du nombre d’erreurs de médication et d’augmentation de l’efficacité des ressources. Cependant, leur incidence est propre à chaque établissement et l’utilisation de cette technologie nécessite une intégration réfléchie dans le processus de
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?
Tsao et al. observed that mean charge capture rates of medicines improved from 63% pre-ADC to 97% post-ADC, leading healthcare providers to bill for a larger proportion of medications used, thus improving revenue accrual rates.
“Tsao et al. observed that mean charge capture rates of medicines improved from 63 % pre-ADC to 97 % post-ADC, leading healthcare providers to bill for a larger proportion of medications used, thus improving revenue accrual rates.54”
From Benefits and challenges associated with implementation and ongoing use of automated dispensing cabinet for medicines: A scoping review (2025) · cites this paper as [54]
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: 14
- Hohl CM, Nosyk B, Kuramoto L, Zed PJ, Brubacher JR, Abu-Laban RB, et al. Outcomes of emergency department patients presenting with adverse drug events. Ann Emerg Med. 2011;58(3):270-9.e4.
- 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(9):768-85.
- Automated dispensing cabinets in the Canadian environment. ISMP Canada Saf Bull. 2007;7(3):1-3. Also available from: www.ismp- canada.org/download/safetyBulletins/ISMPCSB2007-03ADCs.pdf
- Lee L, Wellman G, Birdwell S, Sherrin T. Use of an automated medication storage and distribution system. Am J Hosp Pharm. 1992; 49(4):851-5.
- Borel J, Rascati K. Effect of an automated, nursing unit-based drug- dispensing device on medication errors. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1995; 52(17):1875-9.
- Ray M, Aldrich L, Lew P. Experience with an automated point-of-use unit-dose drug distribution system. Hosp Pharm. 1995;30(1):18,20-3,27-30.
- Schwarz H, Brodowy B. Implementation and evaluation of an automated dispensing system. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1995;52(8):823-8.
- Guerrero RM, Nickman NA, Jorgenson JA. Work activities before and after implementation of an automated dispensing system. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1996;53(5):548-54.
- Wise L, Bostrom J, Crosier J, White S, Caldwell R. Cost-benefit analysis of an automated medication system. Nurs Econ. 1996;14(4):224-31.
- Shirley K. Effect of an automated dispensing system on medication administration time. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1999;56(15):1542-5.
- Chapuis C, Roustit M, Bal G, Schwebel C, Pansu P, David-Tchouda S, et al. Automated drug dispensing system reduces medication errors in an intensive care setting. Crit Care Med. 2010;38(12):2275-81.
- Wickström G, Bendix T. The "Hawthorne effect"-what did the original Hawthorne studies actually show? Scand J Work Environ Health. 2000;26(4):363-7.
- Ledlow G, Stephens J, Fowler H. Sticker shock: an exploration of supply charge capture outcomes. Hosp Top. 2011;89(1):1-8.
- American Society of Health-System Pharmacists. ASHP guidelines on the safe use of automated medication storage and distribution devices. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 1998;55(13):1403-7.
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
“54 Liou et al. noted that pharmacists spent on average 5.6 ± 0.2 h less per month dealing with requests for medication supply.”
Influential
- Authors
- Tsao, N. W., Lo, C., Babich, M., Shah, K., & Bansback, N. J.
- Affiliations
- University of British Columbia (CA)
- Fraser Health (CA)
- Venue
- The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy
- Published
- 2014-04-30
- Volume
- 67
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 138-48
- ISSN
- 0008-4123 (ISSN-L)
- 1920-2903
- PMC
- PMC4006759
- OpenAlex
- W2170103466
- Cited by
- 70
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 8 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 3
- FWCI
- 5.82
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- bronze
- www.cjhp-online.ca
- Locations
- The Canadian Journal of Hospital Pharmacy (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Emergency Medical Services › Patient Safety and Medication Errors
- Life Sciences › Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics › Pharmacology › Pharmacy and Medical Practices
- Health Sciences › Health Professions › Occupational Therapy › Safe Handling of Antineoplastic Drugs
- Keywords
- medication errors, drug safety, cost-effectiveness, pharmacy technicians, nursing workload, Canadian hospitals, health technology adoption, hospital operating costs, medication administration errors, medication dispensing errors
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