Development of a Productivity Model at a Pharmacy Consolidated Service Center

Abstract

Background: Health systems have implemented pharmacy consolidated service centers to address increased patient volume, elevated drug costs, and decreased reimbursements. Assessing pharmacy productivity remains a challenge as metrics have historically been determined by calculations of variables that do not capture the actual work. Several investigators have demonstrated improved labor outcomes in health-system pharmacy with the use of novel productivity models. However, the utility of a novel productivity model at a pharmacy consolidated service center has not been assessed.

Objective: To develop a productivity model with validation by comparison to past time periods to represent work at a Pharmacy Consolidated Service Center.

Methods: The amount of time needed to complete work was determined by performing time studies. A Modified Delphi process was used to ensure appropriate perception of workload. Time standards for each category were averaged to determine the specific relative value units which were then multiplied by total biweekly orders and combined with fixed activities to determine the unit of service. Actual hours worked were obtained for six pay periods prior to compare tool productivity to actual productivity.

Results: Time studies were performed over a three-month period. Total average hours per pay period calculated by the tool for repackaging was 167.4 or 2.1 full-time equivalents (FTEs) and for warehousing was 176.8 or 2.2 FTEs. While tool productivity followed the same trends as historical calendar day productivity, it was consistently higher per pay period over the 12-week comparison.

Conclusion: By performing time studies, a productivity model was developed for a Pharmacy Consolidated Service Center that generated productivity data that correlates with 12 weeks of data using a historical model. This study provides the ability to assess trends over time with more precise evaluation of work leading to the discussion that this tool is superior to historical productivity models.