无菌无菌制备的自动化:风险分析及与手工工艺的生产率比较

Jeanne Heloury, Guillaume Bouguéon, T. Deljehier, A. Jourand, A. Berroneau, S. Crauste-Manciet
{"title":"无菌无菌制备的自动化:风险分析及与手工工艺的生产率比较","authors":"Jeanne Heloury, Guillaume Bouguéon, T. Deljehier, A. Jourand, A. Berroneau, S. Crauste-Manciet","doi":"10.1515/PTHP-2019-0001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Two automation methods for aseptic preparation in hospital pharmacy, robot and peristaltic pump, were compared to manual process both for risk analysis using Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) method and for productivity using time analysis grids built for each process. The results obtained with the different workflow organizations showed that the worst-case conditions for productivity was production “on demand” of tailor-made preparations. in that case, the manual process was not significantly different from the robotic process (p-value=0.72). For the standardized preparations, the semi-automatic process preparing a batch from bulk solution from “to be reconstituted” drugs was significantly superior to the robotic process preparing repetitive series of doses (p-value<0.01). Productivity of the robot was dramatically increased when the robot performed standardized preparations either from ready to use solutions or mixed cycles due to the robot design. When different processes were FMECA analyzed for risk analysis the robotic process was found as the safer process in comparison to others with a total of Criticality Indexes of 1060, 719, 656 for manual, semi-automatic and robot, respectively. Except for the robotic, semi-automatic and manual processes needed additional IT control systems to limit the risk of failures.","PeriodicalId":19802,"journal":{"name":"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy","volume":"10 1","pages":"15 - 28"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"9","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Automation of Aseptic Sterile Preparation: Risk Analysis and Productivity Comparison with Manual Process\",\"authors\":\"Jeanne Heloury, Guillaume Bouguéon, T. Deljehier, A. Jourand, A. Berroneau, S. Crauste-Manciet\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/PTHP-2019-0001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Two automation methods for aseptic preparation in hospital pharmacy, robot and peristaltic pump, were compared to manual process both for risk analysis using Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) method and for productivity using time analysis grids built for each process. The results obtained with the different workflow organizations showed that the worst-case conditions for productivity was production “on demand” of tailor-made preparations. in that case, the manual process was not significantly different from the robotic process (p-value=0.72). For the standardized preparations, the semi-automatic process preparing a batch from bulk solution from “to be reconstituted” drugs was significantly superior to the robotic process preparing repetitive series of doses (p-value<0.01). Productivity of the robot was dramatically increased when the robot performed standardized preparations either from ready to use solutions or mixed cycles due to the robot design. When different processes were FMECA analyzed for risk analysis the robotic process was found as the safer process in comparison to others with a total of Criticality Indexes of 1060, 719, 656 for manual, semi-automatic and robot, respectively. Except for the robotic, semi-automatic and manual processes needed additional IT control systems to limit the risk of failures.\",\"PeriodicalId\":19802,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy\",\"volume\":\"10 1\",\"pages\":\"15 - 28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"9\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/PTHP-2019-0001\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pharmaceutical Technology in Hospital Pharmacy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/PTHP-2019-0001","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 9

摘要

摘要:将机器人和蠕动泵两种用于医院药房无菌制剂的自动化方法与人工流程进行比较,采用失效模式效应和临界性分析(FMECA)方法进行风险分析,并利用为每个流程构建的时间分析网格进行生产率分析。在不同的工作流程组织下得到的结果表明,生产率的最坏情况是生产“按需”定制的准备。在这种情况下,人工过程与机器人过程没有显著差异(p值=0.72)。对于标准化制剂,从“待重构”药物的原液中制备批次的半自动工艺显著优于制备重复系列剂量的机器人工艺(p值<0.01)。由于机器人的设计,当机器人从准备使用的溶液或混合循环进行标准化准备时,机器人的生产率显着提高。在对不同工艺进行FMECA风险分析时,发现机器人工艺相对于其他工艺更安全,手动、半自动和机器人的临界指数分别为1060、719、656。除了机器人,半自动和手动过程需要额外的IT控制系统来限制故障的风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Automation of Aseptic Sterile Preparation: Risk Analysis and Productivity Comparison with Manual Process
Abstract Two automation methods for aseptic preparation in hospital pharmacy, robot and peristaltic pump, were compared to manual process both for risk analysis using Failure Modes Effects and Criticality Analysis (FMECA) method and for productivity using time analysis grids built for each process. The results obtained with the different workflow organizations showed that the worst-case conditions for productivity was production “on demand” of tailor-made preparations. in that case, the manual process was not significantly different from the robotic process (p-value=0.72). For the standardized preparations, the semi-automatic process preparing a batch from bulk solution from “to be reconstituted” drugs was significantly superior to the robotic process preparing repetitive series of doses (p-value<0.01). Productivity of the robot was dramatically increased when the robot performed standardized preparations either from ready to use solutions or mixed cycles due to the robot design. When different processes were FMECA analyzed for risk analysis the robotic process was found as the safer process in comparison to others with a total of Criticality Indexes of 1060, 719, 656 for manual, semi-automatic and robot, respectively. Except for the robotic, semi-automatic and manual processes needed additional IT control systems to limit the risk of failures.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
7
审稿时长
12 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:481959085
Book学术官方微信