Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparative study of preparation of hazardous drugs with different closed-system drug transfer devices by means of simulation with fluorescein / Estudio comparativo de preparación de fármacos peligrosos con varias modalidades de sistemas cerrados mediante simulación con fluoresceína
González Haba Peña, Eva; Manrique Rodríguez, Silvia; Herranz Alonso, Ana M; Pérez Castán, Patricia; Moreno Gálvez, Mónica; Iglesias Peinado, Irene; Sanjurjo Sáez, María.
Affiliation
  • González Haba Peña, Eva; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
  • Manrique Rodríguez, Silvia; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
  • Herranz Alonso, Ana M; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
  • Pérez Castán, Patricia; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
  • Moreno Gálvez, Mónica; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
  • Iglesias Peinado, Irene; Universidad Complutense de Madrid. Faculty of Pharmacy. Madrid. Spain
  • Sanjurjo Sáez, María; Hospital General Universitario Gregorio Marañón. Pharmacy Service. Madrid. Spain
Farm. hosp ; 40(6): 496-503, nov.-dic. 2016. ilus, graf, tab
Article in En | IBECS | ID: ibc-158017
Responsible library: ES1.1
Localization: BNCS
ABSTRACT
Objectives: The level of environmental contamination generated during preparation and administration of hazardous drugs using different valve closed-systems and their combinations was compared. The actual impact on the overall time of preparation of cytostatics and the economic cost of the different modalities were also compared. Methods: Comparative study of the preparation of fluorescein mixtures with different modalities of valve closed-system combinations. Environmental contamination was detected in critical points of connection, and in splashes produced at any other points. The main variable was qualitative detection of contamination by splashes through ultraviolet light when modalities with or without a connector were compared. A final number of 160 mixtures were prepared to detect differences of at least 5%. Results: Splashes were produced in 7 preparations without a connector (p = 0.015). No significant differences (p = 0.445) were detected either in the use of a supporting vial spike vs an anchoring spike, or in the ChemoCLAVE® system vs valve systems with Fleboflex® solutions. Contamination at any critical point was produced in all preparations. The use of a supporting vial spike, syringe connector and bag solution with Luer connection was the most efficient modality. Conclusions: A syringe connector is needed to guarantee a closed system. Anchoring spikes do not show higher advantages as compared with supporting vial spikes. Fleboflex® solutions with Luer bags are more efficient than ChemoCLAVE® and show similar safety. However, connections of these closed systems are not leak-tight, and it is therefore important to continue studies of contamination of the different closed system transfer devices (AU)
RESUMEN
Objetivo: Comparar la contaminación generada durante la elaboración y administración de fármacos peligrosos con diferentes componentes de sistemas cerrados y de manera secundaria, seleccionar el sistema más eficiente. Material y métodos: Estudio comparativo de elaboración de mezclas de fluoresceína con diferentes combinaciones de sistemas cerrados de tipo valvular. Se consideró contaminación ambiental la detectada en los puntos críticos de conexión y las salpicaduras generadas en cualquier otro punto distinto. La variable principal fue la detección cualitativa mediante luz ultravioleta de contaminación por salpicaduras al comparar las modalidades con y sin conector. Se calculó un tamaño muestral de 160 preparaciones por modalidad, para detectar diferencias de al menos un 5%. Resultados: Se produjeron salpicaduras en 7 preparaciones, todas sin conector (p = 0,015). No se encontraron diferencias entre utilizar punzón de apoyo o de anclaje (p = 0,445), ni entre el sistema ChemoCLAVE® vs sistema valvular con sueros Fleboflex®. En todas las preparaciones se produjo contaminación en algún punto crítico. La utilización de punzones de apoyo, conectores y sueros luer se ha identificado como la modalidad más eficiente. Conclusiones: Es importante utilizar el conector de jeringa para que el sistema sea completamente cerrado. El uso de punzones de anclaje no parece presentar ventajas frente a los de apoyo y la combinación con los sueros Fleboflex® presenta una seguridad similar al sistema ChemoCLAVE®. Sin embargo, las conexiones de estos sistemas no son secas y, por tanto, es importante continuar con estudios de contaminación que comparen diferentes sistema (AU)
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 06-national / ES Database: IBECS Main subject: Pharmacy Service, Hospital / Hazardous Substances / Drug Compounding / Antineoplastic Agents Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Farm. hosp Year: 2016 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 06-national / ES Database: IBECS Main subject: Pharmacy Service, Hospital / Hazardous Substances / Drug Compounding / Antineoplastic Agents Type of study: Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research / Risk_factors_studies Limits: Humans Language: En Journal: Farm. hosp Year: 2016 Document type: Article