Productivity and aseptic process evaluation during batch production simulation of intravenous medications using a semi-automated compounding device.

IF 1 4区 医学 Q4 ONCOLOGY
Ana C Riestra, Jaione Grisaleña, Naiara Telleria, Gerardo Cajaraville
{"title":"Productivity and aseptic process evaluation during batch production simulation of intravenous medications using a semi-automated compounding device.","authors":"Ana C Riestra, Jaione Grisaleña, Naiara Telleria, Gerardo Cajaraville","doi":"10.1177/10781552241304009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Intravenous (IV) medications can be prepared using compounding devices to increase productivity, and reduce risks associated with aseptic compounding. This study evaluated the productivity and quality outcomes of the aseptic process for simulated batches of IV medications used in clinical practice produced using a semi-automated compounding device (Gri-fill; Grifols).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Simulated batches from 50 to 600 preparations were completed representing hazardous and non-hazardous drugs, including one-step single component (atropine sulfate, cisplatin) and multistep, multiple component (mitomycin C, piperacillin/tazobactam, trastuzumab, 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine). Productivity, device autonomy, quality of the aseptic process (media-fill test) and sterility of the preparations were evaluated.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 2024 final preparations and 460 intermediate products were compounded during 78 working hours. For low and high complexity level preparations, median (minimum-maximum) production speed was 1.3 (0.6-1.7) and 3.7 (2.6-4.3) min per preparation, respectively. The longest process (36.2 min/bag) was the preparation of a simulated gemcitabine 3 L bulk solution bag, which included reconstitution of vials and filling the bulk bag. All operational errors (0.6%) were resolved autonomously by the user. None of the 883 media fill preparations showed microbiological growth and all 114 analyzed preparations passed the sterility test.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Using a semi-automated compounding device, preparation efficiency of IV medications ranged from 14 preparations/h for multicomponent preparations from vials requiring reconstitution, to 100 preparations/h for low complexity preparations using a bulk solution bag. The aseptic processes demonstrated the absence of microbial growth in all tested preparations.</p>","PeriodicalId":16637,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","volume":" ","pages":"10781552241304009"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10781552241304009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Intravenous (IV) medications can be prepared using compounding devices to increase productivity, and reduce risks associated with aseptic compounding. This study evaluated the productivity and quality outcomes of the aseptic process for simulated batches of IV medications used in clinical practice produced using a semi-automated compounding device (Gri-fill; Grifols).

Methods: Simulated batches from 50 to 600 preparations were completed representing hazardous and non-hazardous drugs, including one-step single component (atropine sulfate, cisplatin) and multistep, multiple component (mitomycin C, piperacillin/tazobactam, trastuzumab, 5-fluorouracil and gemcitabine). Productivity, device autonomy, quality of the aseptic process (media-fill test) and sterility of the preparations were evaluated.

Results: A total of 2024 final preparations and 460 intermediate products were compounded during 78 working hours. For low and high complexity level preparations, median (minimum-maximum) production speed was 1.3 (0.6-1.7) and 3.7 (2.6-4.3) min per preparation, respectively. The longest process (36.2 min/bag) was the preparation of a simulated gemcitabine 3 L bulk solution bag, which included reconstitution of vials and filling the bulk bag. All operational errors (0.6%) were resolved autonomously by the user. None of the 883 media fill preparations showed microbiological growth and all 114 analyzed preparations passed the sterility test.

Conclusions: Using a semi-automated compounding device, preparation efficiency of IV medications ranged from 14 preparations/h for multicomponent preparations from vials requiring reconstitution, to 100 preparations/h for low complexity preparations using a bulk solution bag. The aseptic processes demonstrated the absence of microbial growth in all tested preparations.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
7.70%
发文量
276
期刊介绍: Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to educating health professionals about providing pharmaceutical care to patients with cancer. It is the official publication of the International Society for Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP). Publishing pertinent case reports and consensus guidelines...
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信