Electronic prescription as a driver for digitalization in Finnish pharmacies.
Community pharmacy
Digitalization
Dispensing process
Electronic prescription
Sociotechnical system
Journal
BMC health services research
ISSN: 1472-6963
Titre abrégé: BMC Health Serv Res
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101088677
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
27 Sep 2021
27 Sep 2021
Historique:
received:
21
02
2021
accepted:
30
08
2021
entrez:
27
9
2021
pubmed:
28
9
2021
medline:
29
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Finnish community pharmacies have undergone digitalization during the past decade. The introduction of the electronic prescription has had a significant impact on pharmacy workflows, such as the dispensing process. This inevitably has significant sociotechnical implications. We examine the impact of digitalization on the dispensing process and the sociotechnical orientation of a pharmacy. We utilize data collected in customer service situations in Finnish community pharmacies at two points in time: in the traditional workflow, when electronic prescriptions were not in use, and in the new direct dispensing workflow, which is the usual delivery model in the case of electronic prescriptions. We analyze this data in terms of changes in workflow efficiency. We also draw on existing literature to build a conceptual model for digitalization in the pharmacy sector from a sociotechnical standpoint. In the Finnish environment, the results, based on our study sample, show that with electronic prescriptions and the direct dispensing model, the delivery time for a single medication over the counter was reduced by 13%. The results also indicate that the process has become more predictable, as the variation in terms of the workflow lead time has decreased. The results indicate that the dispensing process has become more efficient in terms of time and throughput as well as more technically oriented and predictable. From a sociotechnical perspective, the results indicate that the technical subsystem has strengthened, and pharmacies have adapted to the new technology in the dispensing process.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Finnish community pharmacies have undergone digitalization during the past decade. The introduction of the electronic prescription has had a significant impact on pharmacy workflows, such as the dispensing process. This inevitably has significant sociotechnical implications. We examine the impact of digitalization on the dispensing process and the sociotechnical orientation of a pharmacy.
METHODS
METHODS
We utilize data collected in customer service situations in Finnish community pharmacies at two points in time: in the traditional workflow, when electronic prescriptions were not in use, and in the new direct dispensing workflow, which is the usual delivery model in the case of electronic prescriptions. We analyze this data in terms of changes in workflow efficiency. We also draw on existing literature to build a conceptual model for digitalization in the pharmacy sector from a sociotechnical standpoint.
RESULTS
RESULTS
In the Finnish environment, the results, based on our study sample, show that with electronic prescriptions and the direct dispensing model, the delivery time for a single medication over the counter was reduced by 13%. The results also indicate that the process has become more predictable, as the variation in terms of the workflow lead time has decreased.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
The results indicate that the dispensing process has become more efficient in terms of time and throughput as well as more technically oriented and predictable. From a sociotechnical perspective, the results indicate that the technical subsystem has strengthened, and pharmacies have adapted to the new technology in the dispensing process.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34565354
doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-07003-0
pii: 10.1186/s12913-021-07003-0
pmc: PMC8474735
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1017Informations de copyright
© 2021. The Author(s).
Références
Int J Med Inform. 2017 Apr;100:56-62
pubmed: 28241938
Methods Inf Med. 2003;42(4):297-301
pubmed: 14534625
Int J Electron Healthc. 2011;6(1):34-46
pubmed: 21406350
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Jul;73(1):121-8
pubmed: 21664019
Int J Clin Pharm. 2013 Aug;35(4):577-83
pubmed: 23575623
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2020 Apr;16(4):553-559
pubmed: 31253500
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2014 Jan-Feb;10(1):246-51
pubmed: 23688539
Int J Health Care Qual Assur. 2018 Aug 13;31(7):834-844
pubmed: 30354876
Res Social Adm Pharm. 2021 Jan;17(1):1964-1966
pubmed: 32317154
Int J Clin Pharm. 2013 Dec;35(6):1030-5
pubmed: 24078302
Sociol Health Illn. 2014 Jun;36(5):703-18
pubmed: 24641087
Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. 2013 Feb;22(2):145-50
pubmed: 23097415
BMC Health Serv Res. 2012 Dec 20;12:471
pubmed: 23256484
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2011 Nov-Dec;18(6):767-73
pubmed: 21715428
Soc Sci Med. 2012 Jul;75(2):429-37
pubmed: 22571888
Telemed J E Health. 2011 Apr;17(3):217-22
pubmed: 21375413
Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2011 Jan 15;68(2):158-63
pubmed: 21200064
J Am Med Inform Assoc. 2014 May-Jun;21(3):481-6
pubmed: 24154836
Health Soc Care Community. 2011 Nov;19(6):561-75
pubmed: 21623986
J Gen Intern Med. 2010 Jun;25(6):530-6
pubmed: 20186499