Purpose. The primary objective of this study was to compare the levels of environmental contamination before and after the introduction of PhaSeal® (closed-system drug transfer device) in two hospital pharmacies. Our secondary objective was to assess the impact of the device on the duration of drug preparation compared to procedures involving the use of needles and syringes.
Methods. The study involved two French hospitals, which prepared antineoplastic chemotherapy using a biological safety cabinet and an isolator. Five skilled pharmacy technicians at each hospital prepared a total of 100 chemotherapy preparations using the standard procedure and 100 using the PhaSeal® system. To control for possible contamination occurring in the course of the procedure, we used fluorescein which becomes fluorescent when exposed to UV light. To reply the second objective, we timed the duration of the different steps of the manipulation.
Results. Our findings showed a major reduction in the contamination of the work environment when using the PhaSeal® system for drug preparation. Reduction rates higher than 93% were obtained, whatever the type of protection used. On the duration of preparation, our results indicate that this duration would be approximately 1 h longer for the preparation of 100 samples.
Conclusion. In conclusion, this study clearly establishes the benefit of using PhaSeal® for protecting the staff members who work with hazardous agents. It also indicates that the duration of drug preparation is not impacted by the use of the system.
HirstMTseSMillsDG. Caution on handling antineoplastic drugs. N Engl J Med1983; 309: 188–189.
2.
SessinkPJBoerRBScheefhalsAP. Occupational exposure to antineoplastic agents at several departments in a hospital: environmental contamination and excretion of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide in urine of exposed workers. Int Arch Occup Environ Health1992; 64: 105–112.
3.
FavierBGillesLDesageM. Analysis of cyclophosphamide in the urine of antineoplastic drugs handlers. Bull Cancer2003; 90: 905–909.
4.
SugiuraSAsanoMKinoshitaK. Risks to health professionals from hazardous drugs in Japan: a pilot study of environmental and biological monitoring of occupational exposure to cyclophosphamide. J Oncol Pharm Pract2010.
5.
FavierBGillesLLatourJF. Contamination of syringe plungers during the sampling of cyclophosphamide solutions. J Oncol Pharm Pract2005; 11: 1–5.
6.
FavierBGillesLArdietC. External contamination of vials containing cytotoxic agents supplied by pharmaceutical manufacturers. J Oncol Pharm Pract2003; 9: 15–20.
7.
AcamporaACastigliaLMiragliaN. A case study: surface contamination of cyclophosphamide due to working practices and cleaning procedures in two Italian hospitals. Ann Occup Hyg2005; 49: 611–618.
8.
FavierBRullFBertucatH. Surface and human contamination with 5 fluorouracil in six hospital pharmacy. J Pharm Clin2001; 20: 157–162.
9.
Crauste-MancietSSessinkPJFerrariS. Environmental contamination with cytotoxic drugs in healthcare using positive air pressure isolators. Ann Occup Hyg2005; 49: 619–628.
10.
International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners Standards Committee. ISOPP standards of practice. Safe handling of cytotoxics. J Oncol Pharm Pract2007; 13: 1–81.
11.
FavierBGillesLDesageM. Evaluation of pharmacy technicians handling cytotoxic agents in a centralized unit. J Pharm Clin2003; 22: 107–112.
12.
HarrisonBRPetersBGBingMR. Comparison of surface contamination with cyclophosphamide and fluorouracil using a closed-system drug transfer device versus standard preparation techniques. Am J Health Syst Pharm2006; 63: 1736–1744.
13.
WickCSlawsonMHJorgensonJA. Using a closed-system protective device to reduce personnel exposure to antineoplastic agents. Am J Health Syst Pharm2003; 60: 2314–2320.
