ABSTRACT
The high incidence of error reports received by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) involving 2-component vaccines led to collaboration between the United States Pharmacopeia (USP) and the Institute for Safe Medication Practices (ISMP). This collaborating group sought to further understand errors associated with all 2-component vaccines (i.e. vaccine components provided by the manufacturer in physically separate containers) and to provide safe practice strategies for storing, preparing, dispensing, and administering these vaccines as intended. Fourteen available 2-component vaccines were identified. The ISMP National Vaccine Errors Reporting Program (VERP) and the FDA Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) were searched from the initiation of each respective reporting system through December 31, 2019. The three vaccines with the most reported reconstitution errors in the VERP and VAERS are Menveo® (meningococcal), Pentacel® (DTaP, Polio, Haemophilus influenzae type b), and ActHIB® [H. influenzae type b (Hib)]. Manufacturers should design labeling and packaging of vaccines to provide ease of storage and fail-safe preparation to prevent 2-component vaccine errors. Implementing risk reduction strategies, such as training healthcare professionals and affixing storage bin labels, remind healthcare professionals to mix the 2-components and facilitate appropriate administration.
Subject(s)
Haemophilus influenzae type b , Meningococcal Vaccines , Adverse Drug Reaction Reporting Systems , Bacterial Vaccines , United States , United States Food and Drug AdministrationABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To use parts of the APhA Career Pathway Evaluation Program for Pharmacy Professionals in a career development laboratory designed to provide students with relevant information that will help them prepare for successful careers across the profession of pharmacy. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: Students enrolled in the second professional year of pharmacy school participated in an interactive three-hour career development laboratory. Students completed the APhA Career Pathway Evaluation Program for Pharmacy Professionals Online Assessment Tool prior to the laboratory. In class, the students were randomized into eight groups. Two career profiles were assigned to each group for discussion during a thirty-minute brainstorming session. The groups reported their knowledge for each career profile to the entire class, and the instructors supplemented the discussion with details and more specific information about each profile. FINDINGS: Two years of data were collected (n=300 students). One hundred and twenty four (41.3%) students responded to the voluntary post-laboratory survey questions. Overall, students rated the career pathway activities favorably with an average score of 8.13 out of 10. After participation in the discussion, 74 (59.7%) respondents indicated their career interests had been impacted. SUMMARY: This career development laboratory is one example of how the APhA Career Pathway Evaluation Program for Pharmacy Professionals can be effectively incorporated into the PharmD curriculum in order to help students explore the various career options they might not have otherwise discovered on their own.
