These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: An economic comparison of Tubex injection systems with traditional ampuls and vials.
    Author: Miller DE, Grainger WL, Woolard D, Timko JR, Adler DC.
    Journal: Hosp Pharm; 1985 Aug; 20(8):584-91, 595. PubMed ID: 10272398.
    Abstract:
    A time and motion study was performed at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania to measure and compare the direct and indirect costs of the original Tubex and Tubex Fast-Trak injection systems with comparable costs associated with single dose ampuls, vials, and multi-dose vials. Data collection involved observation of 170 injections prepared by 29 nurses on two oncology units over a 7-week period. The time and nondrug supply costs of the Tubex Fast-Trak were lower than those of all other injection systems observed, including the original Tubex. Although the drug acquisition component was higher for the Tubex systems than for conventional injection methods, an analysis of the total cost of the use of Tubex Fast-Trak demonstrated that on an annual basis, the system is nearly equal in cost to the use of single ampuls and vials. Important advantages of the prefilled cartridge system should be considered in addition to labor, supply, and drug costs when selecting cost-effective injection systems. Systems like Tubex offer advantages that may lower total cost of care, such as reduction in wastage, pilferage, contamination, dosage error, and improved cost allocation accuracy. When polled about their opinion, the majority of nurses who participated in the study indicated that Tubex Fast-Trek was their first choice over other injection methods observed.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]