2.10.4. Automatic identification and traceability technologies
Recent technological developments has made possible
systems that using bar-codes or radio frequency identification (RFID) allow
automatic identification and data capture of pharmaceutical products, medical
devices, patients, caregivers, assets, equipment and locations in a faster,
accurate, more efficient way and at a lower cost than manual identification
alone.
Automatic identification systems have a very wide range of
applications, including point-of-care scanning to match product data to patient
data, verification of patient identity via a wristband, enabling the
introduction of robotic dispensing systems, recording implant serial numbers in
patient records and central registries, tracking and tracing of individual
instruments through decontamination, stock control and supplies management,
tracking assets throughout a network of facilities. These technologies make
also feasible a unique identification for each and every pack of drugs or
medical device, which in turn will enable authentication and traceability
systems. All these applications and systems enable the realisation of
associated health and economic benefits: reducing medication errors, preventing
counterfeiting, saving costs and increasing the healthcare supply chain
efficiency and transparency.
Medication errors
More than 30% of all adverse drug events are preventable
and appear to be consequences of medication errors8. Several studies in
different countries indicate the significance of medication errors. For
example: in the UK, the NHS has calculated that approximately 60 patients die
each day due to adverse drug errors9. Around 10% of admissions are
likely to incur patient safety incidents, which may cost around £2 billion/year
in hospital stay alone. About 400 people per year die, or are seriously
injured, in adverse events involving medical devices. In Spain, an Adverse
Event Study indicated that 9.3% of hospital stays incurred a serious adverse
event, with medication errors being first (37.4% of such events). 10
Medication errors are rarely the fault of an individual
Healthcare professional, but rather represent the failure of a complicated
Healthcare system and can occur anywhere in the distribution system, although
predominantly during prescription and administration. Prescription and
administration are most often associated with medication errors, respectively
standing at 39% and 38%. Dispensing and transcription account for 11% and 12%.
While about half of the prescription errors are intercepted by nurses or
pharmacists before they reach the patient, only 2% of administration errors are
intercepted.
Automating the prescription and administration processes
through bar-code verification at the point-of-care, electronic prescription
systems and robotic dispensing systems will significantly reduce medication
errors. Numerous studies have shown that automatic identification throughout
the entire Healthcare supply chain, right to the point of delivery to the
patient, is an extremely effective tool for preventing medication errors. For
example, the introduction of bedside bar-code scanning at the Gerle
Ziekenhuizen in Maastricht, the Netherlands, resulted in a reduction of 74% in
administration errors (from 3.10% to 0.84%)11. Chelsea and Westminster
Healthcare NHS Trust, UK, introduced a robotic dispensing system in May 2003. A study in the hospital pharmacy found that dispensing errors were reduced by 67% from 2.7% to
0.9% of prescriptions12.
In Europe, around 1% of pharmaceuticals are now
counterfeit according to the WHO13. As counterfeiting becomes more
sophisticated, these products are increasingly present even in developed markets,
for example because of increased Internet-based sales through illegal Internet
pharmacies. In 2006, 2.7 million items were seized by European Customs, a 384%
growth versus 2005(14). It is likely that counterfeiting will continue
to significantly increase over the next years. The US based Centre for
Medicines in the Public Interest predicts that counterfeit drug sales will
reach US$ 75 billion globally in 2010, an increase of more than 90% from 200515.
The introduction of a unique identification for drugs or
medical device, where appropriate, will enable authentication and traceability
systems that will make it much more difficult for counterfeiters to intrude
into the Healthcare supply chain, or at least make it uneconomical. The first step
is to assign a unique identity to a product at the point of manufacture, which
then remains with it throughout the supply chain until its consumption. This
unique identification can then be crosschecked against a remote database and so
make it possible to verify and authenticate a product at any point of the
supply chain, including dispensing or point of sale. Counterfeiters would then
first of all need a legitimate identification number that is registered in the
database and linked to the correct item to enable authentication. In the worst
case, two packs of drugs with the same serial number would be present in the
supply chain, in which case stakeholders would be alerted about this intrusion
when the second pack is being crosschecked.
Manual systems and processes in hospitals are unable to
efficiently handle the constant change that occurs with supplies (inventory
control, product recall, etc.). For example, administrative costs along supply
chains in healthcare constitute roughly 30 to 40% of healthcare costs but only
6-8% in the retail industry and 3-6% in the grocery industry – both areas in
which computer-based technologies routinely streamline how products are traced
and distributed. An EHMA16 study indicated that 30-50% of all
stock-on-hand in most hospitals is waste of working capital, with inventory for
example being obsolete, expired or in excess17. Considering that
inventory management accounts for between 17% and 35% of a hospital’s total
budget, it is evident that reductions in inventory management costs can
significantly improve hospital budgets18.
Automatic identification and traceability systems allow
automating and hence simplifying and improving accuracy in a number of supply
chain processes, including order processing, receiving/shipping management
(simplification of product identity control and quantity checks of incoming
goods) and inventory management (e.g. monitoring shelf life and automatic
re-stocking).
For example, one UK trust, deploying a robotic dispensing
system, saw a reduction in time spent in the dispensary by 34% for pharmacists
and 51% for technicians, enabling far more time to be spent on the wards,
working directly with patients and ward staff19. The implementation of
an electronic prescription process and automatic product identification in the
San Raffaele Scientific Institute in Italy resulted in a 30% cost reduction in
the drug supply chain20.
The availability of automatic identification systems in
hospitals today is very low: it is estimated that less than 10% of hospitals
currently use bar-codes for medication administration. The penetration of
automatic identification technologies is higher with other healthcare supply
chain stakeholders. Most pharmaceutical and medical device manufacturers and
distributors already provide and use bar-codes or RFID tags for internal
logistics purposes (often at logistic unit level). Retail pharmacies have also
embraced bar-coding to a much larger extent than hospitals and use it at the
point of sale.
Hospitals have delayed investment in the hardware and
software necessary for automatic identification until manufacturers routinely
bar-code or tag at the unit-dose level as this is necessary for a hospital to
reap all possible benefits.
Some EU Member States have regulated national numbers to
be labelled on the unit-of-use packages to enable reimbursement and to check
product registration. These diverging national requirements require
manufacturers to adapt production and packaging lines per market, which
increases the costs of production and supply chain management and hampers the
development of a truly internal market, i.e. one of the primary objectives of
the EU.
A few EU Member States are also investigating
possibilities to implement national traceability systems for pharmaceuticals.
Again, EU-wide or global standardisation would increase the efficiency
throughout the supply chain and reduce the possibility of medication errors and
counterfeiting.
Only global and open standards enable the realisation of
all Healthcare and economic benefits related to automatic identification and
traceability systems. Open, technology-independent standards permit full
interoperability and compatibility. End users are not locked into proprietary
solutions and R&D resources can be created and used for other added value
developments, once standards have been adopted. It also strengthens the
competitiveness of companies by aligning national solutions and thus removing
barriers impeding access to other markets.
Healthcare is by nature a global sector, with supply
chains that often cross borders. A global standardised system for traceability,
from product manufacture to patient treatment, is imperative to comply with the
increasing legal requirements for product traceability around the world. In
cases of cross border trading, a global identification number can be used to
identify that product in any country without any restrictions or errors.
Local needs are incorporated into global standards, but
local standards will jeopardise the realisation of the related benefits.
Country-specific regulations may satisfy the needs of those countries, but when
products move across borders throughout the global supply chain, this causes
problems. It will be more difficult to achieve implementation on a national
level due to the complexity of the myriad of systems required for various local
requirements. Identification numbering schemes developed for one tracking
system will not necessarily be recognised by another and the cost burden to the
stakeholders in the healthcare supply chain will increase significantly.
Identification numbering should be as ubiquitous as bar-coding of grocery
items, whilst taking into account the specific needs of healthcare.
The Expert Group on Safe Medication Practices of the
Council of Europe strongly recommends the related stakeholders “to update the
National and European legislative framework to require complete and unambiguous
labelling of every single unit of use of all licensed medicines products” using
the GS1 System of global standards21. The Department of Health in the
UK already called for the use of standardised information in healthcare: “The
case for coding is compelling, but all stakeholders need to work to commonly
agreed standards if the benefits are to be realised fully. The Department of
Health is recommending that the GS1 System should be adopted throughout the
Healthcare system in England, both for manufactured products and for coding
systems used within healthcare settings, such as patient identification codes
on wristbands.” 22