Pharmacists' Perceptions of 3D Printing and Bioprinting as Part of Personalized Pharmacy: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study in Bulgaria.

IF 2 Q3 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY
Pharmacy Pub Date : 2025-06-19 DOI:10.3390/pharmacy13030088
Anna Mihaylova, Antoniya Yaneva, Dobromira Shopova, Petya Kasnakova, Stanislava Harizanova, Nikoleta Parahuleva, Rumyana Etova, Ekaterina Raykova, Mariya Semerdzhieva, Desislava Bakova
{"title":"Pharmacists' Perceptions of 3D Printing and Bioprinting as Part of Personalized Pharmacy: A Cross-Sectional Pilot Study in Bulgaria.","authors":"Anna Mihaylova, Antoniya Yaneva, Dobromira Shopova, Petya Kasnakova, Stanislava Harizanova, Nikoleta Parahuleva, Rumyana Etova, Ekaterina Raykova, Mariya Semerdzhieva, Desislava Bakova","doi":"10.3390/pharmacy13030088","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Advances in pharmaceutical technology have positioned 3D printing and bioprinting as promising tools for developing personalized drug therapies. These innovations may redefine compounding practices by enabling precise, patient-specific drug formulations. Evaluating pharmacists' readiness to adopt such technologies is therefore becoming increasingly important. <b>Aim:</b> The aim of this study is to investigate pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers regarding the application of 3D printing and bioprinting technologies, as well as their perspectives on the regulation and implementation of these technologies in the context of personalized pharmacy. <b>Materials and Methods:</b> A custom-designed questionnaire was developed for the purposes of this pilot study, based on a review of the existing literature and informed by expert consultation to ensure conceptual relevance and clarity. The survey was conducted between September and December 2024. The data collection instrument comprises three main sections: (1) sociodemographic and professional characteristics, (2) knowledge regarding the applications of 3D printing and bioprinting in pharmacy, and (3) attitudes toward the regulatory framework and implementation of these technologies. <b>Results:</b> A total of 353 respondents participated, and 65.5% of them (n = 231) correctly distinguished between the concepts of \"3D printing\" and \"bioprinting.\" More than 25% (n = 88) were uncertain, and 8.5% (n = 30) were unable to differentiate between the two. Regarding the perceived benefits of personalized pharmacy, 83% (n = 293) of participants identified \"the creation of personalized medications tailored to individual needs\" as the main advantage, while 66% (n = 233) highlighted the \"optimization of drug concentration to enhance therapeutic efficacy and minimize toxicity and adverse effects.\" Approximately 60% (n = 210) of the pharmacists surveyed believed that the introduction of 3D-bioprinted pharmaceuticals would have a positive impact on the on-site preparation of customized drug formulations in community and hospital pharmacies. Lack of regulatory guidance and unresolved ethical concerns were identified as primary barriers. Notably, over 40% (n = 142) of respondents expressed concern that patients could be subjected to treatment approaches resembling \"laboratory experimentation.\" Nearly 90% (n = 317) of participants recognized the need for specialized training and expressed a willingness to engage in such educational initiatives. <b>Conclusions:</b> Three-dimensional printing and bioprinting technologies are considered cutting-edge instruments that may contribute to the advancement of pharmaceutical practice and industry, particularly in the field of personalized medicine. However, respondents' views suggest that successful integration may require improved pharmacist awareness and targeted educational initiatives, along with the development and adaptation of appropriate regulatory frameworks to accommodate these novel technologies in drug design and compounding.</p>","PeriodicalId":30544,"journal":{"name":"Pharmacy","volume":"13 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12196576/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/pharmacy13030088","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Advances in pharmaceutical technology have positioned 3D printing and bioprinting as promising tools for developing personalized drug therapies. These innovations may redefine compounding practices by enabling precise, patient-specific drug formulations. Evaluating pharmacists' readiness to adopt such technologies is therefore becoming increasingly important. Aim: The aim of this study is to investigate pharmacists' knowledge, attitudes, and perceived barriers regarding the application of 3D printing and bioprinting technologies, as well as their perspectives on the regulation and implementation of these technologies in the context of personalized pharmacy. Materials and Methods: A custom-designed questionnaire was developed for the purposes of this pilot study, based on a review of the existing literature and informed by expert consultation to ensure conceptual relevance and clarity. The survey was conducted between September and December 2024. The data collection instrument comprises three main sections: (1) sociodemographic and professional characteristics, (2) knowledge regarding the applications of 3D printing and bioprinting in pharmacy, and (3) attitudes toward the regulatory framework and implementation of these technologies. Results: A total of 353 respondents participated, and 65.5% of them (n = 231) correctly distinguished between the concepts of "3D printing" and "bioprinting." More than 25% (n = 88) were uncertain, and 8.5% (n = 30) were unable to differentiate between the two. Regarding the perceived benefits of personalized pharmacy, 83% (n = 293) of participants identified "the creation of personalized medications tailored to individual needs" as the main advantage, while 66% (n = 233) highlighted the "optimization of drug concentration to enhance therapeutic efficacy and minimize toxicity and adverse effects." Approximately 60% (n = 210) of the pharmacists surveyed believed that the introduction of 3D-bioprinted pharmaceuticals would have a positive impact on the on-site preparation of customized drug formulations in community and hospital pharmacies. Lack of regulatory guidance and unresolved ethical concerns were identified as primary barriers. Notably, over 40% (n = 142) of respondents expressed concern that patients could be subjected to treatment approaches resembling "laboratory experimentation." Nearly 90% (n = 317) of participants recognized the need for specialized training and expressed a willingness to engage in such educational initiatives. Conclusions: Three-dimensional printing and bioprinting technologies are considered cutting-edge instruments that may contribute to the advancement of pharmaceutical practice and industry, particularly in the field of personalized medicine. However, respondents' views suggest that successful integration may require improved pharmacist awareness and targeted educational initiatives, along with the development and adaptation of appropriate regulatory frameworks to accommodate these novel technologies in drug design and compounding.

药剂师对3D打印和生物打印作为个性化药房的一部分的看法:保加利亚的横断面试点研究。
制药技术的进步使3D打印和生物打印成为开发个性化药物治疗的有前途的工具。这些创新可能通过实现精确的、针对患者的药物配方来重新定义复方实践。因此,评估药剂师是否准备好采用这些技术变得越来越重要。目的:本研究的目的是调查药剂师对3D打印和生物打印技术应用的知识、态度和感知障碍,以及他们对个性化药房背景下这些技术的监管和实施的看法。材料和方法:在对现有文献的回顾和专家咨询的基础上,为确保概念的相关性和清晰度,为本试点研究的目的开发了一份定制设计的问卷。该调查于2024年9月至12月进行。数据收集工具包括三个主要部分:(1)社会人口统计学和专业特征,(2)关于3D打印和生物打印在制药中的应用的知识,以及(3)对这些技术的监管框架和实施的态度。结果:共有353名受访者参与,其中65.5% (n = 231)的人正确区分了“3D打印”和“生物打印”的概念。超过25% (n = 88)的人不确定,8.5% (n = 30)的人无法区分两者。对于个性化药房的好处,83% (n = 293)的参与者认为“根据个人需求定制个性化药物”是主要优势,66% (n = 233)的参与者强调“优化药物浓度,提高治疗效果,最大限度地减少毒副作用”。约60% (n = 210)的受访药剂师认为,引入生物3d打印药品将对社区和医院药房现场定制药物配方的制备产生积极影响。缺乏监管指导和未解决的伦理问题被确定为主要障碍。值得注意的是,超过40% (n = 142)的受访者表示担心患者可能遭受类似于“实验室实验”的治疗方法。近90% (n = 317)的参与者认识到需要进行专门培训,并表示愿意参与此类教育活动。结论:三维打印和生物打印技术被认为是尖端仪器,可能有助于制药实践和工业的进步,特别是在个性化医疗领域。然而,受访者的观点表明,成功的整合可能需要提高药剂师的认识和有针对性的教育举措,以及制定和适应适当的监管框架,以适应药物设计和配制中的这些新技术。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Pharmacy
Pharmacy PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
自引率
9.10%
发文量
141
审稿时长
11 weeks
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信