Comparison of IV oncology infusions compounded via robotics and gravimetrics-assisted workflow processes

DISCLAIMER: In an effort to expedite the publication of articles related to the COVID-19 pandemic, AJHP is posting these manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time PURPOSE: A study was conducted to compare an intravenous (IV) gravimetric technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) platform to an IV robotic system In the study we reviewed both IV technology platforms using the same gravimetric quality assurance system, which allowed for direct comparison METHODS: All oncology preparations compounded from January 2016 through December 2018 using either system were included in our retrospective analysis Final preparation accuracy, IV system precision, and workflow throughput (analyzed using lean process methodologies) were evaluated RESULTS: Data analysis indicated that use of the IV gravimetric TAWF system was associated with a significantly lower percentage of accuracy errors compared to the IV robotics system (1 58% vs 2 47%, P < 0 001), with no significant difference in absolute precision (1 12 vs 1 12 P = 0 952) Lean analysis demonstrated that overall completion time (17:49 minutes vs 24:45 minutes) and compound preparation time (2:39 minutes vs 6:07 minutes) were less with the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotics system CONCLUSION: Implementation of either an IV gravimetric TAWF system or IV robotics system will result in similar compounding accuracy and precision Preparation time was less with use of the IV gravimetric TAWF vs the IV robotic system, but the IV robotic system required less human intervention Both systems ensure medication safety for patients, although the IV robotic system has increased safeguards in place Therefore, the primary driver for implementing these systems is alternative factors such as cost of systems implementation and maintenance, employee safety, and drug waste