Medication Dispensing Statistics

Medication Dispensing Statistics 2023: Facts about Medication Dispensing outlines the context of what’s happening in the tech world.

LLCBuddy editorial team did hours of research, collected all important statistics on Medication Dispensing, and shared those on this page. Our editorial team proofread these to make the data as accurate as possible. We believe you don’t need to check any other resources on the web for the same. You should get everything here only 🙂

Are you planning to form an LLC? Maybe for educational purposes, business research, or personal curiosity, whatever the reason is – it’s always a good idea to gather more information about tech topics like this.

How much of an impact will Medication Dispensing Statistics have on your day-to-day? or the day-to-day of your LLC Business? How much does it matter directly or indirectly? You should get answers to all your questions here.

Please read the page carefully and don’t miss any words.

Top Medication Dispensing Statistics 2023

☰ Use “CTRL+F” to quickly find statistics. There are total 61 Medication Dispensing Statistics on this page 🙂

---

Medication Dispensing “Latest” Statistics

• Positive matches on the patient’s gender, year of birth, and postal code, as well as the discovery of at least 50% of the requested prescriptions, were considered successful matches.^[1]
• Patients who were blocked based on their gender, year of birth, and postal code matches on the entire 7 character at code totaled 98,775, or 58.1% of all patients.^[1]
• Using 50% as the cutoff value enables matching of patient data with only two prescriptions.^[1]
• A sensitivity analysis on the pharmacists’ estimates of the percentage of patients from the GP practice filling prescriptions in their pharmacy for the GP practices with less than 10% coverage.^[1]
• In a sample of 2,000 individuals, Herings discovered that 1.4% of the patients had multiple pharmacy codes.^[1]
• 90% of all Dutch pharmacies were located within the SFK’s catchment region in 2004, which included 1,540 community pharmacies.^[1]
• A total of 110,102 patients’ medical records (64.8%) from 83 general practitioners’ offices were connected.^[1]
• In cities where pharmacists kept a single central patient record, they discovered that more than 99% of all patients had comprehensive prescription dispensing histories.^[1]
• Around 10% of patients consulting a doctor in Australia had had an adverse drug event in the previous six months, and 2% to 3% of all hospital admissions may be ascribed to medication.^[2]
• 43,575, or 23.3%, of the 186,758 associations examined with the 29,891,212 incident medication therapy indicated a significant effect size.^[2]
• A recent evaluation found that SSA is a promising strategy for signal identification in administrative health datasets, with moderate sensitivity of 61% and high specificity of 93% for identifying known adverse drug responses.^[2]
• The gradient boosting classifier was shown to perform better than SSA, increasing sensitivity by 21% while maintaining specificity.^[2]
• Compared to SSA, gradient boosting classifier finds 10% more unidentified possible ADR signals.^[3]
• In particular, the gradient boosting classifier has a sensitivity that is 21% greater than SSA’s and a specificity that is equivalent.^[3]
• In Norwegian hospitals where BCMA was not employed, a recent national assessment of medication mistakes found that 70% of all pharmaceutical errors happened during the delivery of the medicine.^[4]
• The failure to scan 29% of the drugs and 20% of the patient ID wristbands was the cause of medication administration discrepancies.^[4]
• In total, 133 patients (62%) received oral medications only, 59 patients (28%) received both oral and parenteral, while 21 patients (10%) received only parenteral medications.^[4]
• Failure to scan 29% of drugs and 20% of patient wristbands was one example of an organizational departure.^[4]
• Task related policy violations impacted 152 patients (71% during drug delivery) and 140 patients (66% during medication distribution).^[4]
• The observational method recorded technological aspects, and variations were observed in 38 observations (18% of them).^[4]
• Nearly 92% of all retail prescriptions in the united states are filled in around 50,400 retail pharmacies that are not affiliated with hospitals, according to IQVIA Xponent.^[5]
• In 3.6% of U.S. counties, there were enough opioid prescriptions written to provide each citizen with one.^[5]
• In year 2006, the total number of counties is 3,143, number of counties with available data of 2,754 and percentage of counties with available data of 87.6.^[5]
• For each year from 2006–2025, the county maps show these rates for 87.1% to 98.5% of U.S. counties.^[5]
• The measured number of opioid prescriptions written decreased by 1.9% as a consequence of the modification to the measuring window.^[5]
• Consumers often ignore crucial over the counter prescription label information, according to a Harris Interactive Market Poll survey done for the National Council on Patient Information and Education and published in January 2002.^[6]
• An increase of 16.7% was observed in the 3 months following the pharmacist intervention, reaching a 66.9% (SD: 29.9) average PDC, dropping to 62.1% (SD: 32.0) during the 12 months after the intervention.^[7]
• Data from 1805 distinct community pharmacies, or 31.9% of all community pharmacies in Australia, were evaluated (The Pharmacy Guild of Australia, 2018).^[7]
• Prior to the pharmacist’s involvement, the PDC average fell throughout the first 12 months, falling from 53.4% (SD: 29.9) to 47.3% (SD: 28.4).^[7]
• An 8% average PDC reduction was seen 12 months following the pharmacist intervention, according to a study of dispensing data.^[7]
• The average PDC of patients taking rosuvastatin 12 months previous to the pharmacist intervention was 59.4% (SD: 30.6) decreasing on 9.2% to 50.2% (SD: 30.1) in the last trimester before the intervention.^[7]
• The cautious projections of employing PDC, which averaged about 67%, yielded adherence rates in patients that were substantially below the 80% mark or above (Sodihardjo-Yuen et al., 2017).^[7]
• 56% of patients taking rosuvastatin were female and 44% were male, according to patient gender distribution. Irbesartan users are 61% female and 39% male, whereas desvenlafaxine users are 70% female and 30% male.^[7]
• For rosuvastatin, irbesartan, and desvenlafaxine, respectively, the percentage of adherent patients 12 months before to the intervention was 29.1% in 2,851 patients, 29.9% in 1,838, and 27.3% in 488 patients.^[7]
• When a computed MPR is less than 70%, their Medscreen Compliance Program identifies non-adherent patients and alerts the dispensing pharmacist to provide an educational based intervention aimed at boosting medication adherence.^[7]
• Each year, in the United States alone, 7,000 to 9,000 people die due to a medication error.^[7]
• 7.8% of caregivers said they gave an inadequate dosage, 6.6% reported giving an overdose, and 5.4% reported giving the wrong medication (PLOS One, 2016).^[8]
• A dispensing mistake affects 1.5% of all prescriptions in the community (BMJ Open Quality, 2018).^[8]
• Pediatric patients account for up to 30% of drug mistakes reported to U.S Poison Control Centers (U.S. Pharmacist, 2019).^[8]
• There is a median medication mistake rate of 8%-25% during drug administration (Patient Safety Network, 2018).^[8]
• 41% of Americans claim to have either personally or indirectly experienced a medical mistake (Institute for Healthcare Improvement/NORC at the University of Chicago, 2017).^[8]
• 41.2% of prescription mistakes in a survey of 14,983 pharmacist interventions included cardiovascular drugs (Archives of Internal Medicine, 2003).^[8]
• 70% of the medications in certain nations’ supply chains are phony pharmaceuticals (National Crime Prevention Council, 2021).^[8]
• According to estimates from the Patient Safety Network, medication mistakes happen at rates between 2% and 33% in homes.^[8]
• According to Paul & Perkins (2021), due to their propensity to take more prescriptions than younger individuals, older patients are more likely to be adversely impacted by a medical mistake during treatment.^[8]
• As many as 30% of the medication errors that are reported to the U.S. Poison Control Centers involve pediatric patients (U.S. Pharmacist, 2019).^[8]
• For instance, a study of two groups of Medicare patients revealed that those without prescription coverage used statins at a rate of 4.1% while those with drug insurance used them at a rate of 27%.^[9]
• At the time of discharge, it was discovered that 44% of 384 elder veterans had had at least one unnecessary medication treatment.^[9]
• The proportion of in hospital prescriptions that were written with improper modifications for renal state decreased from 46% to 33% with the use of decision aids, showing a somewhat successful result.^[9]
• Patients who had begun using clarithromycin were 12 times more likely to have digoxin toxicity.^[9]
• Eighty-one of these drugs were stopped. Over a 13 month follow up, 2% of patients rejoined, and there were no notable adverse effects that might be attributed to stopping.^[9]
• Creatinine clearance may be calculated for people with stable renal function using established methods that take age into account.^[9]
• Nearly 80% of these caregivers maintained pharmaceutical regimens in a U.S study, and many found this burdensome.^[9]
• More than 30% of people who participated in a Medicare beneficiary survey said they hadn’t discussed their various prescriptions with their doctor in the preceding 12 months.^[9]
• In the four months after the fracture, the medications were stopped for 7% but were freshly prescribed for another 7% of patients.^[9]
• However, a study of drug costs in the United States between 2005 and 2009 indicated that 23.3% of community-dwelling individuals 65 and older with dementia were given medicines with clinically substantial anticholinergic activity (AA).^[9]
• High dosage recipients were more than twice as likely to develop parkinsonism as those who received low doses (HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.42-3.02).^[9]
• The Trial of Nonpharmacologic Interventions in the Elderly (TONE) showed that weight reduction and decreased salt consumption might enable roughly 40% of the intervention group to stop using hypertension medication.^[9]
• The overall rate of ADEs was 9.8 per 100 resident–months; 42 percent of the ADEs were deemed preventable.^[9]
• The cost of drug mistakes has been estimated to be US$42 Billion yearly, or little under 1% of all medical spending worldwide.^[10]
• WHO today unveiled a worldwide commitment to cut severe medication related damage by 50% globally over the next five years.^[10]

Also Read

How Useful is Medication Dispensing

One of the main advantages of medication dispensing is its convenience. Patients no longer have to make multiple trips to the pharmacy to pick up their medications. Instead, they can receive their medications directly from their healthcare provider, saving time and effort. This can be especially beneficial for those with chronic conditions who require regular medication refills.

Furthermore, medication dispensing can help improve medication adherence. Studies have shown that patients are more likely to take their medications as prescribed when they are provided with ample supply at the point of care. By eliminating the need to visit a pharmacy, medication dispensing can also reduce the risk of missed doses and interruptions in treatment, ultimately leading to better health outcomes for patients.

Another benefit of medication dispensing is the potential for cost savings. By cutting out the middleman (i.e., the pharmacy), healthcare providers can potentially offer medications at a lower cost to patients. Additionally, medication dispensing can help reduce unnecessary spending on medications that are never picked up or taken by patients, ultimately leading to more efficient use of healthcare resources.

However, there are also potential drawbacks to medication dispensing that must be considered. For one, some patients may prefer the personalized care and interaction they receive from pharmacists at the pharmacy. For these patients, medication dispensing could be seen as impersonal and lacking in the personal touch that can be crucial for building trust and rapport in the patient-provider relationship.

Furthermore, medication dispensing may not be suitable for all types of medications. Certain medications require specialized storage conditions or monitoring, which may be better handled by a professional pharmacist. In these cases, medication dispensing may not be able to provide the level of care and attention needed for effective treatment.

In conclusion, while medication dispensing can offer numerous benefits in terms of convenience, adherence, and cost savings, it is also important to consider the potential drawbacks and limitations of this practice. Healthcare providers must carefully weigh the pros and cons of medication dispensing to ensure that it is the most suitable option for their patients. Ultimately, the goal should be to provide high-quality, personalized care that meets the unique needs of each individual patient.

Reference

---

1. biomedcentral – https://bmcmedinformdecismak.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1472-6947-6-18
2. springer – https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s40471-018-0176-6
3. nih – https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/29852965/
4. bmj – https://qualitysafety.bmj.com/content/30/12/1021
5. cdc – https://www.cdc.gov/drugoverdose/rxrate-maps/index.html
6. fda – https://www.fda.gov/drugs/information-consumers-and-patients-drugs/working-reduce-medication-errors
7. frontiersin – https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fphar.2019.00130/full
8. singlecare – https://www.singlecare.com/blog/news/medication-errors-statistics/
9. uptodate – https://www.uptodate.com/contents/drug-prescribing-for-older-adults
10. who – https://www.who.int/news/item/29-03-2017-who-launches-global-effort-to-halve-medication-related-errors-in-5-years
11. nih – https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK519065/