IV Workflow Management 2022
Functionality Drives Recent Purchases (A Decision Insights Report)
Health systems rely on IV workflow management solutions to streamline and improve pharmacy operations. Functionality has emerged as the most important criteria for prospective clients; however, no vendor both meets all customer needs and performs at a high level, and each customer base notes gaps in functionality. To (1) understand which solutions are being selected and why and (2) help provider organizations select solutions that meet their unique needs, this report examines 35 recently finalized or pending purchase decisions validated by KLAS between February 2020 and June 2022. Customer satisfaction data provides additional context on which vendors best meet customer expectations.
BD Pyxis IV Prep Leads in Considerations & Selections for Enterprise Pharmacy Portfolio, but Go-Lives Remain Challenging
BD Pyxis IV Prep leads in number of considerations, and over one-third of all purchase decisions in this sample ultimately went in the vendor’s favor. Purchasing organizations mainly select BD due to having other BD products and established relationships with the vendor. Another selection factor is leading adoption of gravimetric analysis. While BD customers appreciate that piece, product functionality is inhibited by cumbersome workflows, causing BD’s overall performance to remain below average. As BD has grown, implementations in the past few years have been more difficult than expected, including unresolved issues with scales certifications, system crashes and inaccuracies, and insufficiently detailed reports. Customers also report a steep learning curve exacerbated by inadequate training and support. A few organizations that have gone live within the last year report smoother implementations.
Epic Meeting Expectations; Some Customers Leaving or Supplementing Solution Due to BYOD Model for Hardware
Epic IV Dispense Prep is offered as a free add-on only to Epic customers, and a BYOD model requires them to purchase and manage hardware on their own. Of interviewed Epic organizations, about 50% seeking an IV workflow management solution consider Epic’s product, and those considering organizations usually select it. Satisfied customers appreciate the solution’s usability and integration benefits for formulary maintenance, labeling, and billing. In recent years, Epic has rolled out photo-capturing and gravimetric analysis functionality, but customers report the BYOD model has led to cameras freezing and inefficient gravimetric analyses, limiting adoption compared to that of other solutions with gravimetric analysis functionality. Challenges implementing and updating hardware due to the BYOD model are ultimately the main reasons organizations don’t select Epic or choose to replace or supplement the solution. Customers want Epic to either manage the hardware or provide guidance on what to use. Additionally, the lack of hard stops in the workflow is a safety concern for some.
What about Omnicell?
Since 2020, KLAS has validated six organizations that selected Omnicell, making them the third–most frequently chosen vendor. Most selections happened prior to 2021. Organizations’ reasons for selection include existing use of the vendor’s other pharmacy products and Omnicell’s new gravimetric analysis functionality. Currently, KLAS hasn’t validated enough live customers to share an overall performance score for Omnicell.
BD PharmacyKeeper Verification (Grifols) Gains Traction Due to Flexibility and Leads in Client Satisfaction
In August 2022, BD acquired Grifols’ PharmacyKeeper Verification, a solution whose consideration rate has increased more than any other product’s in the past couple of years. Organizations often choose the easy-to-use solution for its customizability, implementation flexibility, and EMR integration. The solution currently does not have gravimetric analysis functionality; outside of that, most customers feel the solution meets their functionality needs. They also are highly satisfied with Grifols’ ongoing support, highlighting that the vendor is one of the most responsive vendors they have worked with. Some organizations have replaced the product due to a lack of innovative technology. It is too soon to tell what impact the BD acquisition will have on customer satisfaction.
Baxter Customers Highlight Safety Features; Lacking Innovation Causes Replacements
Baxter’s consideration rate is high thanks to their extensive network of pharmacy customers. Current customers appreciate the solution’s functionality, especially the robust safety features. Baxter’s overall selection rate is the lowest of all products due to lacking innovation and high costs. Some organizations feel the workflow is inefficient and the database is labor intensive. The solution’s physical footprint is also larger than some organizations want. Minimal customer awareness has led to low adoption of Baxter’s new gravimetric analysis functionality.
Functionality Is the Key Driver in IV Workflow Management Purchase Decisions
Of the 35 purchase decisions evaluated for this report, functionality is the main reason organizations choose or don’t choose a vendor, with gravimetric analysis being the most-mentioned functionality. BD Pyxis IV Prep leads in offering this technology, and Baxter and BD PharmacyKeeper Validation are often not chosen because of insufficient or missing gravimetric analysis functionality. Integration (particularly with EMRs) is the second-biggest factor in organizations’ purchasing decisions. Cost is another top consideration; the lack of add-on costs for Epic IV Dispense Prep is attractive for Epic customers, while Baxter’s high costs can be a deterrent.
“DoseEdge System has nice technology. It is integrated well into the workflow and has great data capture. We are compliant with our regulations, and the safety features are excellent. We have really enjoyed the barcode and image capture. Because of the technology, we have been able to remove our pharmacists from the IV room, and they all work remotely. The system has had nice workload and safety advantages. DoseEdge System is user friendly, and it is working well in our system.” —Director (current customer)
“I know Baxter has new add-on technologies that are appealing, but even looking at a demo of the newest DoseEdge System version, we feel like the updates the vendor adds aren’t very substantial. The newest version still looks a lot like what we went live with many years ago.” —Manager (current customer)
“We have been happy with PharmacyKeeper Verification. The vendor has offered really good customer support. We call them about downtime and issues, and their help line is probably one of the best I have ever called. . . . Probably 75% of the time or more, they are actually able to solve the issue on that first phone call without having to call me back or send it off to a different service technician. When they do have to send off my calls, the issue is usually fixed by the second phone call.” —Manager (current customer)
“Grifols does not offer a gravimetric analytics solution, and we are pressing them for integration of that. That is a small gap in their functionality. Originally, we specifically picked Grifols because they didn’t offer that, but now having that functionality is a strong recommendation of ASHP and ISMP, so we would like to be able to do that when we need to. There are also things that PharmacyKeeper Verification is supposed to do that are currently on Grifols’ bug list.” —Director (current customer)
“BD Pyxis IV Prep frees up the number of pharmacists that we need in the IV room. That is our favorite thing about the system. We have faith in the pictures and the gravimetrics that we use. BD Pyxis IV Prep provides us with an appropriate picture of how medication was used.” —Manager (current customer)
“The onboarding reports are very weak. There are certain aspects of the configurations, particularly the ADT management, which are very constraining and not fully built to support a hospital-based practice. . . . For example, if we are doing a gravimetric analysis and sense that something is not going quite the way we expect, there are limited points along the way where we can safely change the measure to volumetric, and those points are not readily identifiable to the end users. There are some limitations to managing different concentrations of the drug that can be ordered. . . . There are also some shortcomings in lot management that cause challenges for us.“ —Manager (current customer)
“Epic IV Dispense Prep is integrated with our EMR. The formulary for order entry in the EMR is the same formulary we use for our IV production. That is a huge advantage of Epic’s system. Anything I order from the EMR is ready to use in Epic IV Dispense Prep. We don’t have to do any formulary maintenance that we wouldn’t already be doing anyway. The system has some of the same safety features as the EMR, and that is probably the biggest benefit. The safety features use barcodes.” —Director (current customer)
“Epic claims that it can do gravimetric verification, but I don’t think the gravimetric verification workflow is efficient yet. It still needs some development. The picture-taking workflow is good enough, but the downside is that Epic isn’t a hardware company. If we want to do those things, we are on our own to figure out what cameras and scales to use. We are on our own if we want to download and install certain drivers for our computers to run those things and communicate back to the Epic system. Those things are possible, but we are taking on a lot more maintenance. With another vendor, we can just pay for those things.“ —Director (current customer)
“Omnicell was the one vendor we looked at who could most clearly talk compounding. Their knowledge base was more significant than any of the other vendors’ knowledge bases. We did a demo with Omnicell, and we put their product developers in front of our smartest directors. There was one question the entire day that the product developers couldn’t answer. The product still needed some enhancements. The people we spoke to clearly understood pharmacy and compounding.” —Manager (customer who selected Omnicell)
“Since Omnicell had newly emerging technology, we knew the solution wouldn’t be perfect.” —Director (considered but didn’t select Omnicell)
About This Report
Data for this report comes from two sources: (1) KLAS Decision Insights data and (2) KLAS performance data.
KLAS Decision Insights Data
All references in this report to organizations’ purchasing motivations comes from KLAS’ Decision Insights data. Since 2017, KLAS has been gathering information as to which vendors are being replaced, considered, and purchased and what factors drive these decisions. KLAS Decision Insights data does not represent a comprehensive census or win/loss market share study. Rather, it is intended to help organizations understand which vendors have market energy and why. The data set in this report comes from 35 organizations that are making or have recently made an IV workflow management decision validated by KLAS from February 2020 to June 2022.
KLAS Performance Data
Each year, KLAS interviews thousands of healthcare professionals about the IT solutions and services their organizations use. For this report, interviews were conducted over the last 12 months using KLAS’ standard quantitative evaluation for healthcare software, which is composed of 16 numeric ratings questions and 4 yes/no questions, all weighted equally. Combined, the ratings for these questions make up the overall performance score, which is measured on a 100-point scale. The questions are organized into six customer experience pillars—culture, loyalty, operations, product, relationship, and value.
Sample Sizes
Unless otherwise noted, sample sizes displayed throughout this report (e.g., n=16) represent the total number of unique customer organizations interviewed for a given vendor or solution. However, it should be noted that to allow for the representation of differing perspectives within any one customer organization, samples may include surveys from different individuals at the same organization. The table below shows the total number of unique organizations interviewed for each vendor or solution as well as the total number of individual respondents.
Some respondents choose not to answer particular questions, meaning the sample size for any given vendor or solution can change from question to question. When the number of unique organization responses for a particular question is less than 15, the score for that question is marked with an asterisk (*) or otherwise designated as “limited data.” If the sample size is less than 6, no score is shown. Note that when a vendor has a low number of reporting sites, the possibility exists for KLAS scores to change significantly as new surveys are collected.
Writer
Natalie Hopkins
Designer
Bronson Allgood
Project Manager
Andrew Wright
This material is copyrighted. Any organization gaining unauthorized access to this report will be liable to compensate KLAS for the full retail price. Please see the KLAS DATA USE POLICY for information regarding use of this report. © 2025 KLAS Research, LLC. All Rights Reserved. NOTE: Performance scores may change significantly when including newly interviewed provider organizations, especially when added to a smaller sample size like in emerging markets with a small number of live clients. The findings presented are not meant to be conclusive data for an entire client base.