Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Group purchasing: vendor selection.

J D Herrick1

  • 1Pharmacy Services, American Healthcare Systems, La Jolla, CA.

American Journal of Hospital Pharmacy
|September 1, 1987
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Purchasing groups evaluate pharmaceutical vendors and products through rigorous screening processes. Vendor selection prioritizes quality and bioequivalence before pricing, with group size influencing the depth of assessment.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Group purchasing: case reports. American Healthcare Systems.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1987
Same author

Monetary incentive for pharmacists to control drug costs.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1985
Same author

Medical committee enforcement of policy limiting postsurgical antibiotic use.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1984
Same author

Evaluating group purchasing through a prime vendor.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1984
Same author

The art of successful delegation.

Topics in hospital pharmacy management·1984
Same author

Evaluation of drug-procurement alternatives.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1984
Same journal

National health care reform, Part 2: Response to pharmacists.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
Same journal

Validity of originality assessment.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
Same journal

Unit dose dispensing of chromic phosphate P 32 suspension.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
Same journal

Hydralazine injection still available.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
Same journal

Improved extemporaneous formulation of cyclosporine ophthalmic drops.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
Same journal

Paclitaxel diluent and the case of the slippery spike.

American journal of hospital pharmacy·1994
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Healthcare Management
  • Pharmaceutical Procurement
  • Supply Chain Optimization

Background:

  • Purchasing groups face challenges in systematically evaluating pharmaceutical vendors and products.
  • Vendor selection processes can be influenced by the size and resources of the purchasing group.
  • Ensuring quality and bioequivalence is crucial in pharmaceutical procurement.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To outline methods used by purchasing groups to assess pharmaceutical vendors and products.
  • To identify key factors influencing vendor and product selection processes.
  • To emphasize the importance of a structured evaluation framework.

Main Methods:

  • Discussion of vendor screening processes, differentiating between small and large purchasing groups.

Related Experiment Videos

  • Highlighting the role of subgroups in data collection and vendor evaluation.
  • Describing the critical sequencing of the selection process, prioritizing quality and bioequivalence over pricing.

    • Main Results:

    • Group size impacts vendor screening strategies; larger groups employ more in-depth assessments.
    • A structured approach, including data categorization tools and quality profiles, aids evaluation.
    • Probationary periods allow mutual assessment between groups and vendors before commitment.

    Conclusions:

    • A defined vendor evaluation process enhances quality assurance and streamlines pharmaceutical procurement.
    • Systematic screening ensures that product pricing is considered only after quality and bioequivalence are confirmed.
    • Transparent evaluation processes inform stakeholders and facilitate effective vendor selection.