New Survey Reveals How Pharmacies Manage Verification Processes

TOP - November 2016, Vol 9, No 4 - Best Practices
Audrey Andrews

Hollywood, FL—Results from a survey of oncology pharmacists from across the country indicate that the verification process for chemotherapy orders is not uniformly electronic. In fact, >25% of responders are still using paper orders, said Carly Duncan, PharmD candidate, of the Cleveland Clinic Florida, Weston. She presented findings from her and her colleagues’ survey at the 2016 annual conference of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network.

“I’m no expert, but I would think all systems would be electronic by now. For the most part, I wouldn’t expect 26% to still be using paper orders,” said Ms Duncan. The study aimed to identify the key points within the verification process that allow for optimum functionality and efficacy for oncology pharmacies. “We were looking at our computer system capabilities against others,” she explained. Her staff wanted to make a case to management for modifying their systems toward more efficiency.

The investigators sent a 10-question survey to members of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Hematology/Oncology group and other oncology professionals, asking how their pharmacies were processing orders. “We expected 25 responses, and we heard from 73 all across the country,” Ms Duncan said.

Key Questions & Answers

Q. Which software does your institution currently use to process chemotherapy orders?
   Beacon, 47%
   Paper orders, 26%
   Other, 28%

Q. What is the workflow of chemotherapy order processing at your institution?
   Physician→Nursing→Pharmacy, 49%
   Physician→Pharmacy→Nursing, 44%
   Other, 7%

Q. If a drug requires a screening before processing, does the system alert the physician when inputting the order and/or the pharmacist of this requirement during the verification process?
   No, 81%
   Yes, 19%

Q. Does your system link its protocols to any of the national guidelines?
   No, 68%
   Yes, 32%

Q. Does your system alert you in the event that the patient does not meet the treatment parameters?
   No, 84%
   Yes, 16%

Q. When a protocol is created, does it contain specific premedications for a regimen based on the national guidelines, or is a generic protocol applied to all regimens?
   Specific, 74%
   Generic, 26%

Q. When a protocol is created, does it contain pertinent lab values to monitor for a particular regimen or is a generic protocol applied to all regimens?
   Specific, 65%
   Generic, 35%.

Verification Processes, Wish List

Pharmacists were asked what their institutions required for verifying medications in a protocol. A total of 52% of respondents said their institutions require double verification of the chemotherapy medications only, and single verification of nonchemotherapy medications; 29% of institutions require double verification of all medications; and 19% require a single verification for all medications.

The pharmacists were also asked which elements of their system they would like to keep or add most. Respondents “overwhelmingly” (65%) cited that they wanted an automatic alert for patients who fall outside of treatment parameters. Elaborating on this point, Ms Duncan explained that the researchers wanted to know whether a system was capable of indicating an alert if a patient had a marker, such as platelet count, that fell outside of the acceptable range. They asked, “Does your system alert you, or do you have to manually check for that?”

“We found that 84% of systems do not have these alerts, so each time the pharmacist, nurse, or physician has to manually check that. These alerts would catch patients who fall through the cracks. It would prevent errors,” Ms Duncan said.

The researchers also thought that it was important to be alerted when a drug requires prescreening (eg, testing for hepatitis B before rituximab is given). Overall, 81% of those surveyed did not have this system. Although her institution also lacks these pop-up alert systems, her department is making it a priority to obtain them, Ms Duncan said.

Related Items
Discussing Costs with Your Patient Can Reduce Financial Toxicity
Chase Doyle
TON - September 2018, Vol 11, No 4 published on September 19, 2018 in Best Practices
The Patient Voice Is Key to Value-Based Care
Gail Thompson
TON - September 2018, Vol 11, No 4 published on September 19, 2018 in Best Practices
Complying with Pharmacy Standards: USP 797/USP 800
Gail Thompson
TOP Web Exclusives published on August 7, 2018 in Best Practices
Suboptimal Dosing of Filgrastim Is Acceptable for Treatment of Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia
Audrey Andrews
TOP - August 2018, Vol 11, No 2 published on August 3, 2018 in Side-Effects Management
Using Cancer Drugs Wisely to Control Costs: Targeted Therapies May Hold the Key
Gail Thompson
TOP - August 2018, Vol 11, No 2 published on August 3, 2018 in Best Practices
Is Your Healthcare Organization Addressing Nurse Fatigue?
TON - March 2018, Vol 11, No 1 published on March 9, 2018 in Best Practices, Nursing
Addressing Usability Concerns in Oncology Electronic Health Records
Meg Barbor, MPH
TON - September 2017, Vol 10, No 5 published on September 10, 2017 in Best Practices
Nurse Navigation Program Improves Access and Satisfaction with Cancer Care
Alice Goodman
TON - July 2017, Vol 10, No 4 published on July 6, 2017 in Best Practices
Streamlining Project at Infusion Center Improves Efficiency
Alice Goodman
TON - July 2017, Vol 10, No 4 published on July 6, 2017 in Best Practices
Chemotherapy Discharge Education Class Improves Patient Safety
Alice Goodman
TON - July 2017, Vol 10, No 4 published on July 6, 2017 in Best Practices
Last modified: January 9, 2017