Meeting the needs
Key studies round-up
This issue refers to recent studies having proven that the CareFusionchemo safety system helps to reduce surface contamination and waste of drugs during withdrawal from vials, maintaining drug stability and sterility during use (p9). Key points from three of these studies are summarised below by Hospital Pharmacy Europe.
Reducing surface contamination and preventing accidental spillage Title of study
Closed-loop delivery systems for the preparation and administration of anti-cancer drugs
Maria Fazio, Gabriella Pieri, Claudia Bacci, Martina Roperti and Antonio Russo
Istituto Clinico Humanitas, Via Manzoni 56, Rozzano, Milan
Source XXIX National Congress SIFO ‘Roles
and responsibilities of the pharmacist for a country and a changing NHS’
Aim of study ● To find evidence to support the claim that closed circuit delivery systems improve safety for both operators and patients
Method ● The closed-loop delivery system was comprised of a spike with a check valve for recovery or removal of the drug, and a multi-adaptor consisting of several spikes with one-way valves, for administration.
● A total of 10,800 preparations over a period of three months were evaluated, using polymer polyolefins and not glass, to prevent absorption of any substance.
Conclusions ● Devices used were versatile and easy to handle.
● Valve seals resulted in the reduction of surface contamination, and the prevention of accidental spillage from the syringes.
● Working under condition of hydrophobic air filters minimised aerosols and facilitated the extraction of drugs.
Proving cost effectiveness through the generation of less waste than competitor products Title of study
Cost determination study of closed system transfer devices
L Barnachea, T Lee, J Gitler and M Saria Source
California Society of Health System Pharmacists, 2011; ICU Medical Inc
Aim of study ● To compare and quantify direct and indirect costs of closed system transfer devices
Method ● Five products were evaluated: ChemoClaveTM EquaShield® OnGuardTM
PhaSeal® (ICU Medical Inc.),
(EquaShield Medical Ltd, (B. Braun Medical Inc),
(Becton, Dickinson and
Company) and Texium®/SmartSite® (CareFusion Corp.).
● The direct cost of each product was comprised of the marketed cost of the
system and the cost of each individual component necessary for the compounding and administration of the hazardous drugs. Each unit indirect cost was multiplied by the annual number of infusions (15,312).
● The indirect cost was calculated by measuring the weight of waste generated by each system and multiplying by the number of infusions.
Conclusions ● The least expensive (direct cost) system was ChemoClaveTM
followed by Texium®/SmartSite® ($239,020).
● The system generating the least waste (indirect cost) was Texium® followed by ChemoClaveTM
PhaSeal® (2759 lbs), EquaShield® (3245 lbs) and OnGuardTM
(3550 lbs). www.hospitalpharmacyeurope.com
(2107 lbs) (2321 lbs),
| Page 2
| Page 3
| Page 4
| Page 5
| Page 6
| Page 7
| Page 8
| Page 9
| Page 10
| Page 11
| Page 12
| Page 13
| Page 14
| Page 15
| Page 16
| Page 17
| Page 18
| Page 19
| Page 20
| Page 21
| Page 22
| Page 23
| Page 24
| Page 25
| Page 26
| Page 27
| Page 28