Preparation time and usability assessment of commercially available freeze-dried respiratory syncytial virus vaccine presentations.

Abstract

Background: This study compared health-care practitioners (HCPs) preparation times, preferences, and perception of usability benefits between two respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) vaccine reconstitution systems.

Research design and methods: HCPs with experience reconstituting vaccines prepared two vaccines, the RSVpreF vaccine in a dual chamber vial system (Act-O-Vial; AOV) and the RSVPreF3 vaccine in a vial and vial system (V/V). Following a set of noncommercial instructions, participants completed four timed reconstitution trials with each system. Participants were blinded to systems. After timing trials, feedback was solicited from participants.

Results: Sixty participants completed the study. A timing advantage for the AOV was observed for 55 (92%) participants. Mean (SD) reconstitution times were 88 (22) and 119 (39) seconds for the AOV and V/V, respectively. Forty-five (75%) participants preferred the AOV, with 21 preferring it very strongly. AOV was perceived to be less prone for needle sticks (90%) and medication error (90%), faster (87%), and was considered safer (85%) than the V/V. Overall, 82% of participants reported that the AOV fit their workflow better.

Conclusions: Compared with the V/V, the AOV was faster, preferred by participants, and reported to have more usability benefits. Findings suggest that AOV will be well accepted by HCPs.