Cho Han Na, Wells Lyn, Halford Zachery
Jackson-Madison County General Hospital, Jackson, TN, USA.
Kirkland Cancer Center, Jackson-Madison County General Hospital, Jackson, TN, USA.
J Pharm Technol. 2024 Dec;40(6):269-276. doi: 10.1177/87551225241278203. Epub 2024 Sep 13.
The ever-increasing complexity and demand for antineoplastic therapy necessitates innovative solutions to improve the accuracy and safety of drug preparation. To evaluate the utilization of an advanced robotic chemotherapy drug compounding system (APOTECAchemo) at a Community Cancer Center (CCC), examining accuracy, efficiency, and staff perceptions. This single-center, retrospective study evaluated the preparation of 7 intravenous (IV) antineoplastics at a CCC over a 1-year period. We compared manual methods with the APOTECAchemo system. The primary measure of accuracy was the absolute drug error percentage, with a comparison of pass and fail rates. Secondary endpoints included the overall use of APOTECAchemo for all IV antineoplastic preparations and average preparation times. An end-user satisfaction survey gathered feedback from pharmacists and pharmacy technicians. A total of 8210 doses were prepared at the CCC, with 52.1% compounded by APOTECAchemo and 47.9% manually. Of these, the CCC prepared 5526 doses of the 7 routinely compounded antineoplastics. APOTECAchemo prepared 3851 (69.7%) doses, while manual compounding accounted for 1675 (30.3%) doses. The average absolute drug error was 1.44% (95% CI, 1.35-1.53) with robot compounding versus 1.17% (95% CI, 1.03-1.32) with manual ( < 0.001). The overall failure rate was 0.72%. There were 25 failed doses (0.45%), with 8 (0.2%) failures attributed to APOTECAchemo and 17 (1%) to manual compounding ( < 0.001). The average dose preparation time was longer with APOTECAchemo compared with manual methods. The end-user satisfaction survey indicated a positive reception toward APOTECAchemo. Our study demonstrates the successful implementation, extensive utilization, and high accuracy of both APOTECAchemo and manual compounding methods in the preparation of routinely administered antineoplastics at a CCC.
抗肿瘤治疗的复杂性和需求不断增加，这就需要创新的解决方案来提高药物配制的准确性和安全性。为了评估社区癌症中心（CCC）先进的机器人化疗药物配制系统（APOTECAchemo）的使用情况，考察其准确性、效率和工作人员的看法。这项单中心回顾性研究评估了CCC在1年时间里7种静脉注射（IV）抗肿瘤药物的配制情况。我们将手工方法与APOTECAchemo系统进行了比较。准确性的主要衡量指标是绝对药物误差百分比，并比较通过率和失败率。次要终点包括APOTECAchemo在所有IV抗肿瘤药物配制中的总体使用情况以及平均配制时间。一项终端用户满意度调查收集了药剂师和药房技术人员的反馈。CCC共配制了8210剂药物，其中52.1%由APOTECAchemo配制，47.9%由手工配制。其中，CCC配制了7种常规配制的抗肿瘤药物中的5526剂。APOTECAchemo配制了3851剂（69.7%），而手工配制占1675剂（30.3%）。机器人配制的平均绝对药物误差为1.44%（95%CI，1.35 - 1.53），而手工配制为1.17%（95%CI，1.03 - 1.32）（P < 0.001）。总体失败率为0.72%。有25剂失败（0.45%），其中8剂（0.2%）归因于APOTECAchemo，17剂（1%）归因于手工配制（P < 0.001）。与手工方法相比，APOTECAchemo的平均剂量配制时间更长。终端用户满意度调查表明对APOTECAchemo的接受度较高。我们的研究表明，APOTECAchemo和手工配制方法在CCC常规使用的抗肿瘤药物配制中都成功实施、得到广泛应用且具有很高的准确性。
