Literature DB >> 27894224

Comparative study of preparation of hazardous drugs with different closed-system drug transfer devices by means of simulation with fluorescein.

Eva González-Haba Peña1, Silvia Manrique Rodríguez1, Ana Mª Herranz Alonso1, Patricia Pérez Castán1, Mónica Moreno Gálvez1, Irene Iglesias Peinado2, María Sanjurjo Saez1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The level of environmental contamination generated during preparation and administration of hazardous drugs using different valve closed-systems and their combinations was compared. The actual impact on the overall time of preparation of cytostatics and the economic cost of the different modalities were also compared.
METHODS: Comparative study of the preparation of fluorescein mixtures with different modalities of valve closed-system combinations. Environmental contamination was detected in critical points of connection, and in splashes produced at any other points. The main variable was qualitative detection of contamination by splashes through ultraviolet light when modalities with or without a connector were compared. A final number of 160 mixtures were prepared to detect differences of at least 5%.
RESULTS: Splashes were produced in 7 preparations without a connector (p = 0.015). No significant differences (p = 0.445) were detected either in the use of a supporting vial spike vs an anchoring spike, or in the ChemoCLAVE® system vs valve systems with Fleboflex® solutions. Contamination at any critical point was produced in all preparations. The use of a supporting vial spike, syringe connector and bag solution with Luer connection was the most efficient modality.
CONCLUSIONS: A syringe connector is needed to guarantee a closed system. Anchoring spikes do not show higher advantages as compared with supporting vial spikes. Fleboflex® solutions with Luer bags are more efficient than ChemoCLAVE® and show similar safety. However, connections of these closed systems are not leak-tight, and it is therefore important to continue studies of contamination of the different closed system transfer devices. Copyright AULA MEDICA EDICIONES 2014. Published by AULA MEDICA. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27894224     DOI: 10.7399/fh.2016.40.6.10607

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Farm Hosp        ISSN: 1130-6343


  4 in total

1.  Evaluation of Different Quality-Relevant Aspects of Closed System Transfer Devices (CSTDs).

Authors:  Ahmed Besheer; Hanns-Christian Mahler; Anja Matter-Schwald; Sergio Mompart Barrenechea; Martin Vogt; Pascal Chalus; Pauline Heymes; Timothy Pillow; Andrea Kirste; Patrick Favrod; Susanne Joerg; Roman Mathaes
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2020-04-09       Impact factor: 4.200

2.  Review of economic data on closed system transfer drug for preparation and administration of hazardous drugs.

Authors:  Annaelle Soubieux; Cynthia Tanguay; Jean Lachaine; Jean-François Bussières
Journal:  Eur J Hosp Pharm       Date:  2019-02-22

3.  Source apportionment and quantification of liquid and headspace leaks from closed system drug-transfer devices via Selected Ion Flow Tube Mass Spectrometry (SIFT-MS).

Authors:  Amos Doepke; Robert P Streicher
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2021-11-04       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 4.  Closed-system drug-transfer devices plus safe handling of hazardous drugs versus safe handling alone for reducing exposure to infusional hazardous drugs in healthcare staff.

Authors:  Kurinchi Selvan Gurusamy; Lawrence Mj Best; Cynthia Tanguay; Elaine Lennan; Mika Korva; Jean-François Bussières
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2018-03-27
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.