CareFusion 303, Inc.
[2021] APO 11
•26 February 2021
IP AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN PATENT OFFICE
CareFusion 303, Inc. [2021] APO 11
Patent Application: 2014268828
Title:Medication preparation queue
Patent Applicant: CareFusion 303, Inc.
Delegate: Dr S.D. Barker - Deputy Commissioner of Patents
Decision Date: 26 February 2021
Hearing Date: 19 September 2020 by videoconference. Further written comments were filed on 2 October 2020.
Catchwords: PATENTS – examiner objection – manner of manufacture – balance of considerations indicates the substance of the invention as claimed is a scheme – opportunity to amend
Representation: Patent attorneys for the applicant: Rachel Hooke, Manuel Schmidt, Michelle Cato of FB Rice
IP AUSTRALIA
AUSTRALIAN PATENT OFFICE
Patent Application: 2014268828
Title:Medication preparation queue
Patent Applicant: CareFusion 303, Inc.
Date of Decision: 26 February 2021
DECISION
The invention as claimed is not a manner of manufacture. I allow the applicant the time remaining under regulation 13.4(1)(g) to propose amendments.
REASONS FOR DECISION
This matter arises under the Patents Act 1990 (the Act), and concerns patent application 2014268828 filed by CareFusion 303, Inc. on 16 May 2014. The application is presently undergoing examination.[1] Four adverse reports have been issued, and the only outstanding objection relates to the ground of manner of manufacture. The applicant asked to be heard in relation to the objection.
[1] The first examination report issued on 26 July 2019.
The specification
There are eight amendments proposed during the examination. No objection has been raised to the allowability of the amendments. In this decision I am considering the specification as proposed to be amended, and wherever I refer to the specification, it is a reference to the specification as proposed to be amended.
The invention as described
The field of the invention is the preparation of medications in a healthcare facility. In this environment it is often necessary to prepare medications for specific patient needs, as distinct from utilising medications in a form provided by a supplier. An example is the preparation of a medication in the form of an intravenous medication. The preparation of medications takes place in a pharmacy within the facility. When the medication is prepared, it is placed in a pick-up location and delivered by a delivery person.[2]
[2] Specification at paragraph [0002] to [0004].
The specification does not clearly state whether computer systems had been used to manage the work flow of pharmacies. However, the way that the specification is written provides no basis to suggest that the present application is the first application of computer systems to the management of pharmacy workflow. Rather, it seems implicit that the present invention is a modification of an existing computer system so that it can achieve an improvement in the preparation and distribution of medications. This is consistent with the fact that the examiner raised two citations in the first examination report (these objections were dropped). The problem with existing computer systems is not explicitly stated, and is instead inferred from the advantages of the present invention.
In general terms, the invention relates to a system for managing the preparation and distribution of medications:
"The present disclosure generally relates to medication distribution, and, in particular, relates to systems and methods for managing preparation and delivery of a medication in a healthcare facility."[3]
[3] Specification at paragraph [0001].
The distribution that is envisaged involves the use of computers. The specification states that one aspect of the invention involves determining whether an order for a medication can be filled using returned medication. This determination is carried out by a processor:
"The one or more processors is configured to execute the instructions to receive information indicative of an order for medication for a patient from an electronic data feed, and determine whether the order for medication for the patient can be filled with a returned ('retrieved' or 'retrievable') medication. The one or more processors is also configured to provide a notification to fill the order with the returned medication when the determination indicates the order can be filled with a returned medication, and provide a notification to fill the order by preparing the medication when the determination indicates a returned medication is not available to fill the order."[4]
[4] Specification at [0005].
Another aspect of the invention involves ordering a queue of orders for medication, based on a variety of factors. This determination is carried out by a processor:
"The one or more processors is configured to execute the instructions to receive information indicative of an order for medication for a patient from an electronic data feed, and determine a position in a virtual queue configured to display multiple medication orders to be filled based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the medication, an estimated amount of time to deliver the medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the medication, a type of the medication, or a component of the medication. The one or more processors is also configured to execute the instructions to provide an indicator of the order for medication for display at the position in the virtual queue."[5]
[5] Specification at [0008].
Another aspect involves both determining whether an order can be filled using returned medication and ordering a queue.[6] The specification refers to systems, methods and machine-readable storage media in relation to each aspect of the invention. The system generally includes a display screen, a memory that stores instructions, a processor that executes instructions. Otherwise, the system carries out the steps of the method. The machine-readable storage medium carries instructions that cause the processor to carry out the instructions.
[6] Specification at [0011].
The process for managing the filling of medication orders is set out in Figure 3, reproduced here:
The nature of the system that carries out the process is very general, as shown in Figure 2:
The client 110 and the server 130 can be implemented on a computer, having the generic features shown in Figure 5:
The nature of this system is explained in general terms:
"FIG 5 is a block diagram illustrating an example computer system 500 with which the client 110 and server 130 of FIG 2 can be implemented. In certain aspects, the computer system 500 may be implemented using hardware or a combination of software and hardware, either in a dedicated server, or integrated into another entity, or distributed across multiple entities."[7]
[7] Specification at [0068].
The advantages of this system are stated to be:
"This will result in preventing a compound medication from being made that is no longer needed at that point in time, thereby preventing waste. This will also result in preventing a dispensing of a product out for delivery or finalized and ready for delivery that may no longer be needed by a patient. This will further result in decreasing inefficient use of labor, and keeping a prepared medication on hand to potentially be used for a new order coming in."[8]
"Two or more medication orders that require the same or similar medication components may be grouped together in the queue, for example, to avoid unnecessary wasting of the component used to prepare the medication."[9]
"Such component based aggregation of medication orders may allow a healthcare facility, such as a hospital, to substantially minimize the amount of medication that is wasted when component medications are picked, or retrieved, by a healthcare professional, for the purposes of preparing ordered medications."[10]
[8] Specification at [0023].
[9] Specification at [0024].
[10] Specification at [0050].
I note that the system as presently claimed does not appear to achieve all of these advantages. The specification provides examples of the operation of the system by reference to how it could be used to prepare different medications. The examples are essentially an explanation of what is in the Figures with reference to the name of specific medications. They assist understanding the concepts set out in the Figures. The examples are not intended to provide precise instructions to create or use the systems. A first example explains how to prepare an anaesthetic IV solution. The specification explains that the pharmacy stores anaesthetic drugs and fluids. The anaesthetic and fluids are mixed to produce the anaesthetic IV solution. A medication identification is attached to the package which is then delivered to the patient.[11] The preparation area can use a bar code reader or image reader, which can be used for delivery.[12] The pharmacy server 130 is coupled to a medication database "configured to store a variety of information".[13] Paragraph [0028] gives examples of the sorts of information that can be stored in the database. The server determines whether the order must be filled by preparing new medication or using a medication that has already been prepared.[14] Medication can be returned to the pharmacy and identified by the bar code, to determine whether the medication has passed its expiration date or whether it can be re-used.[15]
[11] Specification at [0026].
[12] Specification at [0027].
[13] Specification at [0028].
[14] Specification at [0029]. The detail of how this determination is made is not set out.
[15] Specification at [0030].
Later an example is provided in relation to the medication Cefazolin. The specification states that where two orders for Cefazolin have been returned, the system could give a notification to combine the returned medication to fill a new order for Cefazolin.[16]
[16] Specification at [0046].
Possible user interfaces for the system are exemplified in Figures 4A, 4B and 4D. Figure 4A, which also relates to Cefazolin, is shown here:
The specification states that an order can indicate that it is to be delivered to the patient in room 5E-12 by 8:00 AM. The system would place the order at a first position in the virtual queue (because the assumed time in Figure 4A is 6:45 AM), and another order for Cefazolin is placed in the second position in the queue because it shares the same medication component.[17] I note that the representations of the interfaces are in specific terms, as distinct from the other aspects of the description.
[17] Specification at [0061].
The program instructions encoded on the computer system may use
"any method well known to those skilled in the art, including, but not limited to, computer languages such as data-oriented languages (e.g. SQL, dBase), system languages (e.g. C, Objective-C, C++, Assembly), architectural languages (e.g. Java, NET), and application languages (e.g. PHP, Ruby, Perl, Python)"[18]
[18] Specification at [0071].
Other computer languages are also listed. The specification does not indicate a preference for any language.
The invention as explained
The applicant stated that the system has the advantage that the pharmacist does not need to scroll through a list of orders on a screen to determine whether some orders should be filled at the same time. This necessarily implies that the state of the art involved the creation of electronic queues of orders, but those queues were ordered in a way that did not necessary group similar orders.
The applicant also explained that the reason for grouping orders is that when a bulk supply of a medicine (such as Cefazolin) is opened to prepare an IV formulation (for instance), there could be wastage of the medicine if it is not used within a "use by" period.
The invention as claimed
The specification as proposed to be amended has 25 claims. The entire claim set is set out in the Annex to this decision. The claims are directed to a system, a method and a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium. The claims follow a pattern that is readily apparent on consideration. Claim 1 is reproduced here.[19]
[19] I have introduced some spacings and indentation between parts of the text to make the structure of the claim easier to understand.
1. A system for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the system comprising:
a display screen;
a memory comprising instructions; and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to:receive, from an electronic data feed, information indicative of a first order for first medication for a patient;
determine, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, a display position of an indicator of the first order for the medication, in a virtual queue, together with multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the first medication of the first order, an estimated amount of time to deliver the first medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the first medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the first medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the first medication, a type of the first medication, and a component of the first medication;
aggregate, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the first order and one or more of the multiple medication orders having a same medication type or a same medication component as the first medication into an aggregated group of orders having the same medication type or the same medication component, such that, when displayed, display position of the indicator of the first order in the virtual queue is visually associated with a second order of the one or more of the multiple medication orders having the same medication type or the same medication component as the first medication, wherein aggregating the group of received orders causes the second order in the group of orders to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen;
provide, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the virtual queue for display on the display screen with the indicator of the first order for medication visually displayed at the display position in the virtual queue, in the aggregated group together with an indicator of the second medication;
receive, after the virtual queue is provided for display, an electronically obtained user verification of an electronic record that the first medication was prepared with the component of the first medication; and
transmit to a mobile device remote from the system, based on receiving the user verification, a first notification regarding a delivery of the first medication,
wherein when the first medication and the second medication have the same medication component, the one or more processors is further configured to provide, for display with the virtual queue, a total amount of the component needed to prepare both the first medication and the second medication.
The applicant submitted that the claim relates to orders for medications that have to be prepared by the pharmacist, and not to medications that are already prepared (e.g. tablets supplied by a pharmaceutical manufacturer). This interpretation can be seen to arise as the system is for "preparation of a medication", which is more consistent with the pharmacist performing the preparation. I accept that this is the proper construction of the claim.
The hardware elements of the system are simple to understand: a screen, a memory and a processor. The system can receive input information about orders for medication. The system creates a virtual queue of orders, and displays the order on the screen. Once the medication has been prepared, a notification is sent to a mobile device outside the system. The bulk of the text of the claim relates to the mechanism for ordering the virtual queue.
The queue order is based on a first order, which is then altered to a second order. The first order is determined based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the first medication of the first order, an estimated amount of time to deliver the first medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the first medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the first medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the first medication, a type of the first medication, and a component of the first medication. How these factors determine the first order is not defined. The second order arises from aggregating orders which have the same medication type or the same medication component as the first medication. The system is not required to make use of information related to the ability to reuse returned medication. That feature appears in the appended claim 6.
I note that the system is capable of aggregating orders. This means that the claim is not expressly limited to situations in which this aggregating actually happens. However, it seems to me to be extremely unlikely that in the normal operation of the system there would never be an opportunity to aggregate orders. I do not think it is necessary to resort to principles such as purposive construction or absurd construction. In the normal operation of the system it would be inevitable that aggregating would take place, at least occasionally.
Claim 11 is directed to a method for managing preparation of a medication for a patient. The method has features that are also seen in claim 1. Claim 17 introduces the feature of reuse of returned medication.
Claim 22 is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium, which is characterised by the instructions it carries for a processor to carry out the steps of the method of claim 11.
Claim 23 is directed to a system which creates an order for filling medication orders. This time the order is determined by considering whether the order can be filled with returned medication and then considering whether to aggregate multiple orders using the same medication. This system is not significantly different to that in claim 6. Claim 24 is directed to a method for managing preparation of a medication that mirrors the steps in claim 23. Claim 25 is directed to a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium which is characterised by instructions to carry out the steps of the method of claim 24.
The objection
The examiner formed the view that the substance of the claims is a scheme for queuing, and consequently the invention defined by all claims (there were 27 claims at the time of the last report) is not a manner of manufacture. I have set out the objection in full:
Claims 1 – 27 do not define a manner of manufacture within the meaning of Section 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990. In general, the principles set out in D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc [2015] HCA 35 (Myriad), Commissioner of Patents v RPL Central Pty Ltd [2015] FCAFC 177 (RPL) and other cases require analysing whether the claimed invention, as a matter of substance rather than form, is suitable subject matter for a patent.
The substance of the claimed invention is to be determined by, amongst other things, construing the specification with an understanding of the state of the art, thus determining the true nature of the invention.
The current invention is directed to a system for managing preparation of a medication for a patient using a computer system. The key feature of the current invention is the display of prescription orders in a virtual queue. This queue is displayed to a person who performs the filling out of the prescriptions in the order displayed.
Using computer systems for displaying a list of prescriptions in the form of a queue was well known at the priority date of the current application and was commonly implemented using generic computing technology. Additionally ordering the prescriptions in the queue based on variety of factors such as pre-defined parameters, the time the order was received, priority of the medication etc was also well known. That aside, it should be noted that ordering a list based on specific parameters is no more than a mere information processing step and does not constitute technical character.
Therefore compared to what was well known at the priority date of the current application, what appears to me to be key to the substance of the invention in the current application is the further aggregation of the queue on the basis of a second parameter, that being medication type or medication component, and the rearranging of a "virtual queue" to provide different information to a user.
Applicant asserts that this aggregation of orders and resultant re-ordering of the queue is a technical improvement in the medication preparation system, allowing for optimised use of the limited screen real estate afforded by the display screen.
I respectfully disagree. While the re-ordering brings a prescription order to the top of the queue, which otherwise would have been at a bottom of the queue, it is not resulting in any technical improvement to the medication preparation system. Additionally this reordering is achieved by conventional steps. The invention is characterised by the nature of the information presented, and not by any material improvement in the manner of presenting information to a viewer.
Applicant's attention is drawn to the fact that Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited [2016] APO 49 was about the specific interface provided. In your case, the alleged invention does not provide any improvement in interface function wherein the interface is being used only for displaying particular user options for selection. Instead, in the current invention a well known interface is provided where a virtual queue is re-ordered based on an additional parameter (medication type). In other words, the substance of the invention is in a rule for ordering a queue.
In fact Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited [2017] APO 1 (Aristocrat ‘17) is more applicable to the current case. The delegate in Aristocrat ‘17 considered the substance of the invention to include the specific way in which the games were divided into groups with group-specific associated sets of bet denominations. The delegate did not consider this substance to produce any technical, practical or useful result, and did not see any improvement in the relevant computer technology.
Applicant further asserts that graphical visualization of a delivery path involves communications occurring between remotely separated device, resulting in a simplified user experience, as the delivery person need not manually search for directions to the delivery location.
Based upon the limited disclosure in the specification P[0065] regarding this feature, it is considered that this feature is achieved using conventional methods and cannot be considered to be the substance of the invention.
Additionally, Applicant asserts that claims defining further steps of storing a captured data and receiving a verification from a user that the components were used in the preparation of the medication are technical in nature.
While these features involve the use technical components, the steps performed by these technical components defined in the claims are performed in a well known and generic way. This is also evident based on the limited disclosure provided in the current specification (Paragraph [0053]). Therefore these features cannot be considered to add to the substance of the invention to the degree that it might be considered technical in nature.
Also, the claimed invention does not provide any technical improvements to the computer or the technological process performed at the pharmacy. The computer system of the current invention is a generic computer well known at the priority date of the current invention based on Fig. 5 of the current invention and corresponding text in the description.
While there may be specific advantages gained by the current invention- that of efficiency in medication preparation and timely use of medication components to reduce wastage, these are achieved by the process of collecting information and using specific rules for ordering a queue and not by any technical contribution to the art.
There does not appear to be any material improvement in the manner of arranging information on a screen, with the substance of the invention lying in the nature of information aggregated and displayed, for logistical efficiency benefits.
A similar invention was present in the decision in Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd v InfoTrack Pty Ltd [2019] FCAFC 161. The claim under consideration in that decision were directed to a method, in an electronic processing device, of displaying information relating to one or more entities, and to an apparatus, which includes an electronic processing device, for displaying information relating to one or more entities. The full bench found the claims to be no more than an instruction to apply an abstract idea (the steps of the method) using generic computer technology (See [99]).
Ordering a queue for optimised use of medication components as claimed is a process which belongs to the realm of organising business activities. As such, this is a business process that results in business improvement (as distinct from technological improvement) and is not a manner of manufacture. Therefore the claimed invention, as a matter of substance, does not define subject matter suitable for a patent.
The examiner's conclusion was that the contribution of the invention is ordering a queue for optimised use of medication components, and this is a scheme and not a patentable process.
The applicant's submissions
The applicant provided helpful written submissions. I will summarise some of those submissions.
ØParagraph [0050] of the specification explains that component based aggregation allows the healthcare facility to minimise medication wastage by facilitating preparation of orders in a manner that minimises the likelihood of component medication being wasted or expiring
ØReordering the virtual queue results in a reduction in the processing demands of the system, as the system handles fewer user inputs.
ØThe interface improves the operation of the system as the pharmacist does not need to scroll to identify orders that use the same component.
At the hearing the applicant elaborated on these points. I will refer to these matters where relevant.
The law on manner of manufacture
Section 18(1) of the Act relevantly reads:
Subject to subsection (2), an invention is a patentable invention for the purposes of a standard patent if the invention, so far as claimed in any claim:
(a) is a manner of manufacture within the meaning of section 6 of the Statute of Monopolies;
The concept of manner of manufacture has developed over time, and is not readily reduced to a simple formula. The classic definition of manner of manufacture is set out in National Research Development Corporation v Commissioner of Patents:[20]
"The inquiry which the definition demands is an inquiry into the scope of the permissible subject matter of letters patent and grants of privilege protected by the section. It is an inquiry not into the meaning of a word so much as into the breadth of the concept which the law has developed by its consideration of the text and purpose of the Statute of Monopolies. ... The right question is: 'Is this a proper subject of letters patent according to the principles which have been developed for the application of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies?' "[21]
[20] [1959] HCA 67, 102 CLR 252 (NRDC).
[21] NRDC at 269, [14].
The High Court then went on to set out a test in terms relevant to the facts of that case:
"a process, to fall within the limits of patentability which the context of the Statute of Monopolies has supplied, must be one that offers some advantage which is material, in the sense that the process belongs to a useful art as distinct from a fine art ... that its value to the country is in the field of economic endeavour."[22]
and
"The effect produced by the appellant's method exhibits the two essential qualities upon which 'product' and 'vendible' seem designed to insist. It is a 'product' because it consists in an artificially created state of affairs, discernible by observing over a period the growth of weeds and crops respectively on sown land on which the method has been put into practice. And the significance of the product is economic; for it provides a remarkable advantage, indeed to the lay mind a sensational advantage, for one of the most elemental activities by which man has served his material needs, the cultivation of the soil for the production of its fruits."[23]
[22] NRDC at 275, [22].
[23] NRDC at 277, [25].
In Grant v Commissioner of Patents[24] the Full Court of the Federal Court considered whether a physical effect was required:
"A physical effect in the sense of a concrete effect or phenomenon or manifestation or transformation is required. In NRDC, an artificial effect was physically created on the land. In Catuity and CCOM as in State Street and AT&T, there was a component that was physically affected or a change in state or information in a part of a machine. These can all be regarded as physical effects. By contrast, the alleged invention is a mere scheme, an abstract idea, mere intellectual information, which has never been held to be patentable, despite the existence of such schemes over many years of the development of the principles that apply to manner of manufacture. There is no physical consequence at all."[25]
[24] [2006] FCAFC 120, 234 ALR 230 (Grant).
[25] Grant at [32].
The High Court has consistently made it plain that NRDC, and all other cases, were not laying down a precise formulation that can be applied unthinkingly:
"Nothing said in the Court's reasons for decision in that case can be taken as an exact verbal formula which alone captures the breadth of the ideas to which effect must be given."[26]
"This Court in NRDC did not prescribe a well-defined pathway for the development of the concept of 'manner of manufacture' in its application to unimagined technologies with unimagined characteristics and implications. Rather, it authorised a case-by-case methodology."[27]
[26] Apotex Pty Ltd v Sanofi-Aventis Australia Pty Ltd [2013] HCA 50, 253 CLR 284 (Apotex) at [83].
[27] D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics Inc [2015] HCA 35, 258 CLR 334 (Myriad) at [23].
That case-by-case approach must have regard to the substance of the claimed invention, not simply the form of the claim.[28] The point is made most succinctly by Gageler and Nettle JJ in the Myriad case:
"Whatever words have been used, the matter must be looked at as one of substance and effect must be given to the true nature of the claim."[29]
[28] Myriad at [6] and [88].
[29] Myriad at [144].
In Commissioner of Patents v RPL Central Pty Ltd[30] the Full Court of the Federal Court said the same thing in the context of a computer implemented invention:
"A claimed invention must be examined to ascertain whether it is in substance a scheme or plan or whether it can broadly be described as an improvement in computer technology. The basis for the analysis starts with the fact that a business method, or mere scheme, is not, per se, patentable. The fact that it is a scheme or business method does not exclude it from properly being the subject of letters patent, but it must be more than that. There must be more than an abstract idea; it must involve the creation of an artificial state of affairs where the computer is integral to the invention, rather than a mere tool in which the invention is performed. Where the claimed invention is to a computerised business method, the invention must lie in that computerisation. It is not a patentable invention simply to 'put' a business method 'into' a computer to implement the business method using the computer for its well- known and understood functions.
Is the mere implementation of an abstract idea in a well-known machine sufficient to render patentable subject matter? Is the artificial effect that arises, because information is stored in RAM and there is communication over the Internet or wifi, sufficient? Does any physical effect give rise to a manner of manufacture? Are the mere presence of an artificial effect and economic utility, without more, sufficient to determine manner of manufacture?
It is not a question of stating precise guidelines but of deciding, in each case, whether the claimed invention, as a matter of substance not form, is properly the subject of a patent."[31]
[30] [2015] FCAFC 177, 115 IPR 461 (RPL Central).
[31] RPL Central at [96] – [98].
The Full Court then went on to discuss a range of considerations that are helpful in the technology of the RPL Central case. The Full Court in Encompass Pty Ltd v InfoTrack Pty Ltd[32] did not find it necessary to revisit the correctness of RPL Central. These recent Full Court cases have focused upon the computer's role to ascertain whether the claimed invention involved "something more" than an abstract idea or scheme.[33]
[32] [2019] FCAFC 161, 372 ALR 646 (Encompass) at [7].
[33] Research Affiliates LLC v Commissioner of Patents [2014] FCAFC 150, 109 IPR 364 (Research Affiliates) at [116], RPL Central at [96] and Encompass at [99]-[102].
In Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited[34] I summarised the considerations arising from RPL Central as:
[34] [2016] APO 49, 123 IPR 341.
"I conclude that it is relevant to consider a range of matters. Without seeking to be exhaustive, these include:
·there must be more than an abstract idea, mere scheme or mere intellectual information;
·is the contribution of the claimed invention technical in nature;
·does the invention solve a technical problem within the computer or outside the computer;
·does the invention result in improvement in the functioning of the computer, irrespective of the data being processed;
·does the application of the method produce a practical and useful result;
·can it be broadly described as an improvement in computer technology;
·does the method merely require generic computer implementation;
·is the computer merely an intermediary or tool for performing the method while adding nothing of substance to the idea;
·is there ingenuity in the way in which the computer is utilised;
·does the invention involve steps that are foreign to the normal use of computers; and
·does the invention lie in the generation, presentation or arrangement of intellectual information."
Considering the context of the present invention, it is relevant to also note that methods of treatment of the human body are patentable:
"a method (or process) for medical treatment of the human body which is capable of satisfying the NRDC Case test, namely that it is a contribution to a useful art having economic utility, can be a manner of manufacture and hence a patentable invention within the meaning of s 18(1)(a) of the 1990 Act"[35]
[35] Apotex at [286].
What is the subject matter of the claims
As already discussed, the subject matter of the claims is straight forward. Claim 1 is directed to a system having three physical integers: a screen, a memory and a processor. The system further has the means to receive input information about orders for medication. The system is programmed to create a virtual queue of orders and display the order on the screen. Once the medication has been prepared, a notification is sent to a mobile device outside the system. The bulk of the text of the claim relates to the mechanism for ordering the virtual queue. The appended claims differ in the detail of the ordering of the queue.
As already discussed, there are also claims directed to methods and machine-readable storage media. These different aspects are unified by the methodology of ordering the queue.
Claim 11 is directed to a method of managing the preparation of a medication using a system. The order for the second medication is displayed "with" the order for the first medication. "With" is a simple word, with a variety of meanings depending on the context. I consider that the most appropriate meaning in the present claim is "accompanied by". The claim does not explicitly state whether the second order is prepared "with" the first order, however that seems to be likely. Claim 17 is appended to any one of claims 11 – 16, but adds the feature that there is an indication whether the first medication can be filled using returned medication. Claim 24 is an independent method claim that is similar to claim 11 and also includes the step of the system receiving notification that the order of the first medication has been filled.
Claim 24 is directed to a method of managing the preparation of a medication using a system. The system determines whether the first order can be filled with an available medication or a returned medication. The method includes the filling of the order and verification that it has been filled using the relevant component.
What is the contribution to the claimed invention
The specification provides little in the way of an explanation of the starting point for the development of the present invention. This is a pity. It appears that computer systems were used as a tool in the pharmacies of healthcare facilities. The nature of the computer systems is otherwise rather unclear, except that it is a clear implication that they are unlike the system in the present application with regard to the ability to reorder the list . At the hearing I suggested that principles of time management were well understood in the Australian community, and they would also have been part of the common general knowledge in all work places (including pharmacies and healthcare facilities).
In Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of Patents[36] the Federal Court stated that a machine of particular construction which implemented a gaming function was, in substance, a machine and not a scheme:
"Simply put, the machine that is the subject of the claims is built to allow people to play games on it. That is its only purpose. In this regard, the physical and virtual features of the display, reels, credit input mechanism, gameplay mechanism and game controller combine to produce the invention. It is a device of a specific character."[37]
[36] [2020] FCA 778 (Aristocrat).
[37] At [98].
Consequently it was not necessary to consider the subsequent question of "whether the scheme has been 'put into a computer' ".[38]
[38] Aristocrat at [100].
In the present case, the system that implements the method is a network of computing devices. The specification does not indicate whether or not the system, and its individual components, are able to carry out any other functions. If the system and its components were "locked down" so that the user could only carry out the single function of the method of the claims, I would expect to see something explicit in the specification. Unlike an electronic gaming machine, it seems more consistent with my experience of the world that the computing devices are able to perform additional functions, such as retrieving information from the internet about medications, and routine office tasks such as receiving emails and reading documents. In the absence of clear language I am not prepared to infer that the system is a machine constructed to carry out a single purpose. It is not reasonable to view the system as a machine of particular construction.
The subject matter does not automatically dictate the substance of the invention, so it is necessary to consider the full range of considerations.
Does the invention as claimed solve a technical problem in the computer
The system is able to carry out the method. I do not consider that this represents the solution of a technical problem in the system The specification does not otherwise suggest that the invention solves a technical problem in a computer or the system as a whole. I do not see any basis to consider that the invention solves a technical problem in a computer or the system.
Is there an improvement in the computer
The computers, and the system as a whole, are improved to the extent that they can now carry out a function that they could not do previously. This in itself is not a relevant improvement when considering manner of manufacture.[39]
[39] Mere implementation on a computer is not sufficient: Repipe Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2019] FCA 1956 at [37], [44] – [47].
The applicant argued that the interface with an ordered list can be seen as an improvement in the computer, and drew attention to earlier decisions where an interface was considered. To my mind, this feature is not intended to improve the computer so much as provide a practical and useful result (discussed below). I am not satisfied that, in this case, this can be regarded as an improvement in the computer.
Does the invention use generic computer technology
Figures 2 and 5 indicate that the system is constructed of well known computing elements (each generic in itself). I cannot say whether the arrangement of the system as a whole (putting to one side the software elements) is normal.
Are there any steps foreign to the normal use of computers
The specification provides no details of how to implement the method on a computer system. This suggests that the applicant considers the method can be implemented using nothing more than the common general knowledge. Consequently I have no reason to believe that the system would utilise any steps foreign to the normal use of computers.
Is there a practical and useful result
The next question in this case is whether there is a practical and useful result. Not every result which might colloquially be considered useful is relevant. In Research Affiliates it was stated that it is not an artificial or patentable effect to merely implement a scheme:
"To take the words of NRDC at 268, the process does not produce 'either immediately or ultimately, a useful physical result in relation to a material or tangible entity.' The claimed method, the result of the ingenuity of the inventors, does not produce such a result; the ingenuity is in the scheme. Again, drawing from NRDC at 270, there is a useful result of the claimed process but there is no physical thing 'brought into existence or so affected as the better to serve man's purposes'. There is no 'physical phenomenon in which the effect, be it creation or merely alteration, may be observed' (NRDC at 276)."[40]
[40] At [114].
I note that the system displays an ordered list of medications. The mere presentation of information on a display is not sufficient, of itself, to provide a useful result.[41] However, the purpose of the system is to present improved information regarding preparation and delivery of medicines in a pharmacy that will allow a reduction in the wastage of medicines.
[41] Consistent with the decision in Encompass.
It has been stated in a series of decisions involving applications by Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc.[42] that an improved process that allowed a machine to be maintained operational had an artificial effect:
"the resulting reduction in the number of tests to be carried out and the reduction in the number of reference samples that are used are, in my view, 'artificial effects' "[43]
"I find the consequent reduced amount of current test sampling required to compute a variability estimate and establish a statistically valid assay range in this case is a physically observable effect within the meaning of that phrase as described in NRDC."[44]
[42] Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. [2017] APO 38 (Bio-Rad 2017), Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. [2018] APO 24 (Bio-Rad 2018), Bio-Rad Laboratories, Inc. [2019] APO 26 (Bio-Rad 2019).
[43] Bio-Rad 2018 at [57].
[44] Bio-Rad 2019 at [46].
I note that the present system will only aggregate orders and produce the result of reduced wastage when two things happen: i) when there is the opportunity for aggregation to occur; and ii) a pharmacist decides to follow the information presented on a screen. Above at paragraph [26] I stated that in the normal operation of the system it would be inevitable that aggregating would take place, at least occasionally. However, a practical and useful result of reduced wastage is only achieved when the pharmacist follows the order displayed by the system.
In the case of claim 24, the system also determines whether the order can be filled using available prepared medication or returned medication. The method goes on to indicate that the order is filled in this way and verification is provided. This is a similar opportunity to reduce wastage, analogous to that achieved by aggregating.
I conclude that a practical and useful result can be achieved by the use of the system, but it is not assured.
Does the invention lie in the generation, presentation or arrangement of intellectual information
The invention involves the generation and presentation of information by ordering and re-ordering the list of orders. However, the list is not simply intellectual information. The information is not presented on the screen so that the pharmacist can decide which order to fill next. That decision has been made by the system, and the order has been optimised according to certain criteria. It is the order in which the work of the pharmacists will be carried out in order to deliver the desired result. It is not fair to state that the invention lies merely in the generation and arrangement of intellectual information.
Balance of considerations
The invention uses generic computing technology to execute a scheme. The result lies in the field of pharmaceuticals, an area that is not inherently unpatentable.
The process has an element that is carried out by a system (the ordering of the list), and an element that is carried out by a person (filing the orders and delivering the orders). Overall the process can achieve a practical and useful effect in reducing wastage of pharmaceutical material. This effect is more than a serendipity – it is the intended outcome of the logic in the reordering process. However, claim 1 is not limited to situations in which this advantage is assured.
It is useful to consider where the ingenuity lies.[45] There is no evidence of ingenuity in implementing the process on a system, or in preparing the system. This normally indicates that the ingenuity lies in the way that the list is ordered rather than the implementation. In Myriad it was noted that there was ingenuity in the idea of looking for mutation in a person's BRCA1 gene. However, that was not sufficient to save the invention as it was further necessary to ask whether the claimed subject matter makes a contribution to that idea:
"Such ingenuity as that entails consists in the idea of examining an isolated fragment of a patient's naturally occurring DNA constituted of the BRCA1 gene for the presence or absence of the specified mutations and polymorphisms. The subject matter of the claim does not make any contribution to the inclusion of the specified mutations and polymorphisms in the mutated BRCA1 gene"[46]
[45] Ingenuity being that which adds to the sum of human knowledge: Myriad at [130].
[46] Myriad at [134].
In the present case there is nothing in the specification to suggest that there has been ingenuity in recognising a shortcoming in any existing system and identifying the need to alter the order in which the medicines are prepared.
It is logical that the ordering of the list could be carried out manually, but as the invention is dealing with time critical steps (so as to avoid wastage of pharmaceuticals), the use of a computer to carry out its steps is an integral part of the way that the invention works and contributes to the invention.
There are thus some considerations suggesting that the contribution is a system, and others suggesting that it is a scheme that is implemented on a system. I note that it is the details of the scheme that are stressed in the description indicating that the locus of the ingenuity lies more in the scheme for ordering the orders than in the system. However, there is the potential for a practical and useful result of the kind that is recognised by the patent system. The invention defined by claim 1 is potentially linked to this result, but the result is not guaranteed. Consequently the weight that I give to this consideration is minimal. I conclude that the contribution to the invention of claim 1 is a scheme. The same conclusion applies to the claims that are appended to claim 1: claims 2 – 10.
The invention defined by claim 11 is directed to a method which includes the filling of an order for the first medication. As stated above, the order for the second medication is filled "with" the order for the first medication. There is a better probability that the practical and useful result is achieved in this case, but this remains speculation and is not assured. The weight given to this consideration is increased, but not significantly given the ambiguity whether the practical and useful result will be achieved. Considering the range of considerations that lie on the other side of the balance I am not satisfied that the practical and useful result is sufficiently assured to conclude that the contribution to the invention is a method rather than a scheme. The same conclusion applies to claims 12 – 21.
The invention defined by claims 22 and 25 is a non-transitory machine-readable storage medium. The balance of considerations for this claim follows from the consideration of claim 1. The invention defined by claim 23 is another system, and the balance of considerations for this claim follows from the consideration of claim 1.
The invention defined by claim 24 can be considered in the same way as the invention defined by claim 11. It is not clear that the contribution to the invention is a method rather than a scheme.
Conclusion
In relation to the invention defined by all claims the contribution to the invention is a scheme, which is not a manner of manufacture.
This conclusion follows because the weight given to the practical and useful result is not sufficient to disturb the balance of considerations. I will allow the applicant the opportunity to propose amendments in line with this decision that might more strongly link the claims to the practical and useful result.
Dr S.D. Barker
Deputy Commissioner of PatentsANNEX: Claims as proposed to be amended
WHAT IS CLAIMED IS:
1. A system for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the system comprising:
a display screen;
a memory comprising instructions; and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to:receive, from an electronic data feed, information indicative of a first order for first medication for a patient;
determine, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, a display position of an indicator of the first order for the medication, in a virtual queue, together with multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the first medication of the first order, an estimated amount of time to deliver the first medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the first medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the first medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the first medication, a type of the first medication, and a component of the first medication;
aggregate, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the first order and one or more of the multiple medication orders having a same medication type or a same medication component as the first medication into an aggregated group of orders having the same medication type or the same medication component, such that, when displayed, display position of the indicator of the first order in the virtual queue is visually associated with a second order of the one or more of the multiple medication orders having the same medication type or the same medication component as the first medication, wherein aggregating the group of received orders causes the second order in the group of orders to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen;
provide, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the virtual queue for display on the display screen with the indicator of the first order for medication visually displayed at the display position in the virtual queue, in the aggregated group together with an indicator of the second medication;
receive, after the virtual queue is provided for display, an electronically obtained user verification of an electronic record that the first medication was prepared with the component of the first medication; and
transmit to a mobile device remote from the system, based on receiving the user verification, a first notification regarding a delivery of the first medication,
wherein when the first medication and the second medication have the same medication component, the one or more processors is further configured to provide, for display with the virtual queue, a total amount of the component needed to prepare both the first medication and the second medication.
2. The system of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the electronic data feed comprises data configured for a Health Level 7 (HL7) framework.
3. The system of Claim 2, wherein the data configured for a HL7 framework comprises medical device data indicating a current or previous status of a medical device.
4. The system of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to:
identify a delivery location for the first order of first medication;
determine whether an order for a second medication is ready for delivery to or near the
delivery location; and
provide a second notification to a device associated with a delivery person responsible for delivering the first order for the first medication to delay delivery of the second medication until the first order of first medication has been filled.
5. The system of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the system further comprises an image recording device, wherein the first order for the first medication comprises at least one component to be formulated into the first medication, and wherein the one or more processors is further configured to:
capture, using the image recording device, an image, video, or barcode information identifying the component used to formulate the first medication;
store the captured image, video, or barcode information in a storage device, in association with a record of the preparation of the first medication; and
receive a user verification that the first order has been filled using the component of the captured image, video, or barcode before transmitting the first notification regarding a delivery of the first medication.
6. The system of any one of the preceding claims, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to:
determine whether the first order for first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication;
when the determination indicates the first order can be filled with a returned medication, provide a notification to fill the first order with the returned medication; and
when the determination indicates a returned medication is not available to fill the order, provide a notification to fill the first order by preparing the first medication.
7. The system of Claim 6, wherein the one or more processors is further configured to determine whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication, and wherein the one or more processors is configured to determine whether the first order for medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication when the determination whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication indicates a prepared medication is not available to fill the first order.
8. The system of Claim 6, wherein when the determination indicates that the first order for the first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication, the one or more processors is further configured to provide, for display, an identification of a pickup location at which the returned medication can be retrieved, wherein the identification of the pickup location and a route to the pickup location from a current location of the mobile device is provided to the mobile device with the first notification.
9. The system of Claim 8, wherein the first notification is configured to cause the mobile device to display a graphical visualization of a path associated with the delivery of the first medication, and wherein the one or more processors is further configured to generate the path based on the pickup location and a delivery location of at least one other medication, wherein the graphical visualization of the path comprises a path by which a delivery person can retrieve the returned medication while delivering the at least one other medication overlaid on a graphically displayed map.
10. The system of Claim 6,
wherein the determination whether the first order for the first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication is based on at least one of an expiration time of the returned medication, an estimated amount of time for delivering the returned medication to the patient, an estimated time at which the returned medication will be administered to the patient, or a delivery deadline for the first order for the first medication for the patient, and
wherein the expiration time of the returned medication is determined based on at least one of a sterility of the returned medication or a stability of the returned medication.
11. A method for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the method comprising:
receiving, from an electronic data feed, information indicative of a first order for first medication for a patient;
determining, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, by one or more computing devices, a display position of an indicator of the first order for the first medication, in a virtual queue, together with multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the first medication of the first order, an estimated amount of time to deliver the first medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the first medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the first medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the first medication, a type of the first medication, and a component of the first medication;
aggregating, into an aggregated group of orders, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the first order and one or more of the multiple medication orders, including a second order, having a same medication type or a same medication component as the first medication;
providing, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, by the one or more computing devices, the virtual queue for display on a display screen with indicators corresponding to the aggregated group of orders visually displayed in the virtual queue on the display screen, wherein the second order is caused by the aggregation to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen with the first order for the first medication;
receiving, after the virtual queue is provided for display, by the one or more computing devices, an electronically obtained user verification of an electronic record that the first medication was prepared with the component of the first medication; and
transmitting, by the one or more computing devices, to a mobile device, remote from the one or more computing devices, based on receiving the user verification, a notification regarding a delivery of the medication,
wherein when the first medication and the second medication have the same medication component, the method further comprises providing, for display with the virtual queue, a total amount of the component needed to prepare both the first medication and the second medication.
12. The method of Claim 11, wherein the indicator of the first order for the first medication is provided for display at a position in the virtual queue associated with another medication having a same type or a same component as the first medication.
13. The method of claim 11 or claim 13, wherein the electronic data feed comprises data configured for a Health Level 7 (HL7) framework.
14. The method of Claim 13, wherein the data configured for a HL7 framework comprises medical device data indicating a current or previous status of a medical device.
15. The method of any one of claims 11 to 14, further comprising:
identifying a delivery location for the first order of first medication;
determining whether an order for another medication is ready for delivery to or near the delivery location; and
providing a notification to a device associated with a delivery person responsible for delivering the first order for the first medication to delay delivery of the second medication until the order of first medication has been filled.
16. The method of any one of claims 11 to 15, wherein the first order for the medication comprises at least one component to be formulated into the first medication, and the method further comprising:
capturing, using an image recording device, an image, video, or barcode information identifying the component used to formulate the first medication;
storing the captured image, video, or barcode information in a storage device, in association with a record of the preparation of the first medication; and
receiving a user verification that the first medication has been filled using the component of the captured image, video, or barcode before transmitting the notification regarding a delivery of the first medication.
17. The method of any one of claims 11 to 16, further comprising:
determining whether the first order for first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication;
when the determination indicates the first order can be filled with a returned medication, providing a notification to fill the first order with the returned medication; and
when the determination indicates a returned medication is not available to fill the first order, providing a notification to fill the first order by preparing the first medication.
18. The method of Claim 17, further comprising determining whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication, and wherein the determining whether the first order for first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication is in response to the determination whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication indicating a prepared medication is not available to fill the first order.
19. The method of Claim 17, wherein when the determination indicates that the first order for the first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication, the method further comprises providing, for display, an identification of a pickup location at which the returned medication can be retrieved, wherein the identification of the pickup location is provided to the mobile device with the notification.
20. The method of Claim 19, wherein the notification is configured to cause the mobile device to display a graphical visualization of a path associated with the delivery of the first medication, and wherein the method further comprises generating the path based on the pickup location and a delivery location of at least one other medication, wherein the graphical visualization of the path comprises a path by which a delivery person can retrieve the returned medication while delivering the at least one other medication overlaid on a graphically displayed map.
21. The method of Claim 17,
wherein the determination whether the first order for the first medication for the patient can be filled with a returned medication is based on at least one of an expiration time of the returned medication, an estimated amount of time for delivering the returned medication to the patient, an estimated time at which the returned medication will be administered to the patient, or a delivery deadline for the first order for the first medication for the patient, and
wherein the expiration time of the returned medication is determined based on at least one of a sterility of the returned medication or a stability of the returned medication.
22. A non-transitory machine-readable storage medium comprising machine-readable instructions for causing a processor to execute a method for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the method comprising:
receiving, from an electronic data feed, information indicative of a first order for first medication for a patient feed, the order comprising a medication component to be formulated into the first medication;
determining, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, a display position of an indicator of the first order for the first medication, in a virtual queue, together with multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the first medication of the first order, an estimated amount of time to deliver the first medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the first medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the first medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the first medication, a type of the first medication, and a component of the first medication;
aggregating, within the virtual queue, responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order, the first order and one or more of the multiple medication orders having a same medication type or a same medication component as the first medication into an aggregated group of orders having the same medication component as the first medication, the aggregated group of orders comprising a second order for a second medication having a display position associated with a display position of the first order;
providing the virtual queue, including the aggregated group of orders, for display on a display screen, wherein the second order for the second medication is caused by the aggregation to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen with the first order for the first medication;
receiving, after the virtual queue is provided for display, by the one or more computing devices, an electronically obtained user verification of an electronic record that the medication was prepared with the component of the medication;
capturing, after the virtual queue is provided for display, using an image recording device, an image, video, or barcode information identifying the medication component formulate the medication;
storing, as verification of an electronic record that the first medication was prepared for the first order with the component of the medication, the captured image, video, or barcode information in a storage device, in association with a record of the preparation of the medication; and
transmitting, by the one or more computing devices, after storing the verification, to a mobile device, remote from the processor, based on receiving the user verification, a notification configured to cause the mobile device to display a graphical visualization of a path associated with a delivery of the medication.
23. A system for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the system comprising:
a memory comprising instructions; and
one or more processors configured to execute the instructions to:
receive information indicative of a first order for medication for a patient from an electronic data feed; and
responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order:
determine whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication;
when the determination whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication indicates a prepared medication or returned medication is available to fill the first order, provide a notification to fill the first order with the available prepared medication or returned medication, the notification comprising a pickup location at which the returned medication can be retrieved;
when the determination indicates an available prepared medication or returned medication is not available to fill the first order, provide a notification to fill the order by preparing the medication;
determine a position for an indicator of the first order for the medication in a virtual queue, configured to display multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the medication, an estimated amount of time to deliver the medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the medication, a type of the medication, and a component of the medication;
provide the indicator of the first order for display on a display screen at the position in the virtual queue;
cause a second medication having a same type or a same component as the medication to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen;
wherein the one or more processors are furthered configured to execute the instructions to:
receive an image or barcode identifying a component used to formulate the medication; provide the image or barcode to a person responsible for verifying the medication is filled using the component;
receive an input indicating the person has verified the first order has been filled using the component; and
provide an indication that the first order for the medication is ready for delivery to the patient.
24. A method for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the method comprising:
receiving information indicative of a first order for medication for a patient from an electronic data feed; and
responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order:
determining whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication;
when the determination whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication indicates a prepared medication or returned medication is available to fill the first order, providing a notification to fill the first order with the available prepared medication or returned medication, the notification comprising a pickup location at which the returned medication can be retrieved;
when the determination indicates an available prepared medication or returned medication is not available to fill the first order, providing a notification to fill the first order by preparing the medication;
determining a position for an indicator of the first order for the medication in a virtual queue, configured to display multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the medication, an estimated amount of time to deliver the medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the medication, a type of the medication, and a component of the medication;
providing the indicator of the first order for display on a display screen at the position in the virtual queue;
causing a second medication having a same type or a same component as the medication to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen;
wherein the method further comprises:
receiving an image or barcode identifying a component used to formulate the medication;providing the image or barcode to a person responsible for verifying the medication is filled using the component;
receiving an input indicating the person has verified the medication has been filled using the component; and
providing an indication that the first order for the medication is ready for delivery to the patient.
25. A machine-readable storage medium comprising machine-readable instructions for causing a processor to execute a method for managing preparation of a medication for a patient, the method comprising:
receiving information indicative of a first order for medication for a patient from an electronic data feed; and
responsive to receiving the information indicative of the first order:
determining whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication;
when the determination whether the first order can be filled with an available prepared medication or a returned medication indicates a prepared medication or returned medication is available to fill the first order, providing a notification to fill the first order with the available prepared medication or returned medication, the notification comprising a pickup location at which the returned medication can be retrieved;
when the determination indicates an available prepared medication or returned medication is not available to fill the first order, providing a notification to fill the first order by preparing the medication;
determining a position for an indicator of the first order for the medication in a virtual queue, configured to display multiple medication orders to be filled, based on at least one of an estimated amount of time to prepare the medication, an estimated amount of time to deliver the medication to a delivery location, an estimated time at which the medication will be needed for administration to a patient at the delivery location, a delivery deadline for the medication, a degree of urgency for delivery of the medication, a type of the medication, and a component of the medication;
providing the indicator of the first order for display on a display screen at the position in the virtual queue;
causing a second medication having a same type or a same component as the medication to move up the virtual queue so as to become visible on the display screen;
wherein the method further comprises:
receiving an image or barcode identifying a component used to formulate the medication;
providing the image or barcode to a person responsible for verifying the medication is filled using the component;
receiving an input indicating the person has verified the medication has been filled using the component; and
providing an indication that the first order for the medication is ready for delivery to the patient.
5
13
0