Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
Share by Email
Print
TEST-DRIVE THE TECHNOLOGY
Competition among manufacturers is keen, Dr Spivey noted—and cancer centers can make that work to their advantage. “Don’t believe those sales guys,” she said. “Test it all out yourself. They should be perfectly willing to give you sample supplies to learn the system and test it out yourself. It’s not a bad idea to ask to test the system for a few weeks so your people have time to see what problems emerge as they use them over time.”
Once staff becomes familiar with a system, overall preparation times should drop significantly. “If you don’t have to worry about vial pressures squirting drugs out, or spills—if you take those out of the link—it makes you more confident,” Dr Spivey explained. “Fewer problems occur that can cause contamination.”
Most manufacturers will send on-site trainers to show staff how to use their equipment, she said. The biggest challenge for new users of PhaSeal is mastering equalization pressures when the drug and air are pushed into a vial, Dr Spivey pointed out. “Sometimes it creates negative pressure and the balloon doesn’t work,” she explained. “Where to push air to create positive pressure becomes real obvious, but you have to learn how to do that by trial and error.”
When testing out new equipment, be particularly vigilant for evidence of leaking filters and membranes at interfaces, Dr Spivey advised. Testing equipment in the pharmacy doesn’t have to involve sophisticated simulations with titanium tetrachloride or fluorescent solutions. Lemon juice will do. “Try putting lemon juice in a vial and testing the products, and then touching it to litmus paper to make sure the outside membranes aren’t leaking,” Dr Spivey suggested. She warned, “Most will.” ONA
Bryant Furlow is a medical writer in Albuquerque, New Mexico.
References
1. Connor TH, McDiarmid MA. Preventing occupational exposures to antineoplastic drugs in health care settings. CA: Cancer J Clin. 2006;56:354-365.
2. Rekhadevi PV, Sailaja N, Chandrasekhar M, et al. Genotoxicity assessment in oncology nurses handling anti-neoplastic drugs. Mutagenesis. 2007;22(6):395-401.
3. Valanis B, Vollmer W, Labuhn K, et al. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents and self-reported infertility among nurses and pharmacists. J Occ Env Med. 1997;39(6):574-580.
4. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs on the evaluation of the carcinogenic risk of chemicals to humans. Lyons, France: IARC;2004. http://monographs.iarc.fr/. Accessed February 6, 2010.
5. International Agency for Research on Cancer. IARC Monographs volume 76: Some antiviral and anti-neoplastic drugs, and other pharmaceutical agents. http://monographs.iarc.fr/ENG/Monographs/vol76/mono76-1.pdf. Accessed February 6, 2010.
6. Occupational Safety and Health Administration. OSHA technical manual: Section VI, chapter 2. www.osha.gov/dts/osta/otm/otm_vi/otm_vi_2.html. Accessed February 2, 2010.
7. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Preventing occupational exposure to antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs in health care settings. www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2004-165. Accessed February 2, 2010.
8. Jorgenson JA, Spivey SM, Au C, et al. Contamination comparison of transfer devices intended for handling hazardous drugs. Hosp Pharmacy. 2008;43(9):723-727.
9. Hedmer M, Georgiadi A, Bremberg ER, et al. Surface contamination of cyclophosphamide packaging and surface contamination with antineoplastic drugs in a hospital pharmacy in Sweden. Ann Occup Hyg. 2005;49(7):629-637.
10. Nygren O, Olofsson E, Johannson L. NIOSH definition of closed-system drug-transfer devices. Ann Occup Hyg. 2009;53(5):549.
11. Nygren O, Olofsson E, Johansson L. Spill and leakage using a drug preparation system based on double-filter technology. Ann Occup Hyg. 2008;52(2):95-98.
