Suppr超能文献

基于称重的技术辅助非危险无菌产品制备工作流程评估。

Evaluation of gravimetric-based technology-assisted workflow for nonhazardous sterile product preparation.

机构信息

University of North Carolina Medical Center, Chapel Hill, NC.

Cleveland Clinic Euclid Hospital, Euclid, OH.

出版信息

Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2019 Jul 2;76(14):1071-1077. doi: 10.1093/ajhp/zxz097.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The impact of a gravimetric-based technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) system on the nonhazardous compounded sterile product (CSP) error capture rate, production times, and pharmacy staff perceptions of compounding methods was evaluated.

METHODS

For 2 weeks prior to TAWF implementation, staff used a punch clock to document production times with a volumetric method. Preimplementation error data were captured in a previous study; TAWF software captured error and time data in the postimplementation period. An online staff survey was administered before and 90 days after TAWF implementation to evaluate perceptions of the 2 methods.

RESULTS

The error capture rates were 0.47% in the preimplementation period and 41.48% in the postimplementation period. The median time to prepare CSPs was significantly shorter in the preimplementation period versus the postimplementation period (p < 0.0001). The median time to check CSPs was significantly shorter at both 90 days (p < 0.0001) and 180 days (p = 0.0006) after TAWF implementation. When asked if the current method was the safest and the most accurate method for preparation, staff members' perceptions improved from neutrality to agreement when the TAWF was implemented. Staff members were in agreement that the volumetric method was faster than the gravimetric TAWF method but were neutral as to whether the latter was the preferred compounding method.

CONCLUSION

The study results indicated that gravimetric-based TAWF preparation of nonhazardous CSPs is slower than manual volumetric preparation but can improve the error capture rate. Staff perceived the gravimetric TAWF method to be the safest and most accurate for producing CSPs.

摘要

目的

评估基于重量的技术辅助工作流程(TAWF)系统对非危害化合物无菌产品(CSP)错误捕获率、生产时间以及药剂师对化合物方法的看法的影响。

方法

在实施 TAWF 前的两周内,工作人员使用打卡钟记录使用体积法的生产时间。实施前的错误数据是在前一项研究中捕获的;TAWF 软件在实施后的期间捕获错误和时间数据。在实施 TAWF 前后 90 天,通过在线员工调查评估对这两种方法的看法。

结果

在实施前的期间,错误捕获率为 0.47%,在实施后的期间,错误捕获率为 41.48%。准备 CSP 的中位数时间在实施前显著短于实施后(p<0.0001)。在实施 TAWF 后 90 天(p<0.0001)和 180 天(p=0.0006),检查 CSP 的中位数时间显著缩短。当被问及当前方法是否是准备工作最安全和最准确的方法时,工作人员的看法从中立变为一致,当实施 TAWF 时。工作人员一致认为,体积法比基于重量的 TAWF 方法更快,但对后者是否是首选的化合物方法持中立态度。

结论

研究结果表明,非危害 CSP 的基于重量的 TAWF 准备工作比手动体积法准备工作慢,但可以提高错误捕获率。工作人员认为基于重量的 TAWF 方法是生产 CSP 最安全和最准确的方法。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验