Gibson Raenel, Klima Ron, Van Horn Jay
Pyros Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, 2001 Route 46, Suite 310, Parsippany, NJ, 07054, USA.
Adv Ther. 2025 Mar;42(3):1484-1493. doi: 10.1007/s12325-024-03089-0. Epub 2025 Feb 3.
Vigabatrin (VGB) is intended for use by caregivers of infants (1 month to 2 years old) diagnosed with infantile spasms (IS). Commercially available vigabatrin powders require caregiver reconstitution prior to oral administration. This study compared the ability of caregivers to accurately provide a targeted dose of vigabatrin using a ready-to-use (RTU) vigabatrin oral solution (VGB-RTU solution) and SABRIL (vigabatrin) powder for oral solution, Lundbeck LLC, (vigabatrin powder) without instruction from a healthcare professional.
A crossover comparative usability study with 30 lay users (15 caregivers with vigabatrin powder experience and 15 oral-syringe/medication preparation naïve users) which required users to deliver a single dose of both VGB-RTU surrogate solution and vigabatrin powder to a sample collection bottle was performed. Doses were measured analytically with a primary endpoint to deliver doses within ± 10% of the target dose of 1125 mg.
All 30 participants administered VGB-RTU solution doses within ± 5% of the target, while only 23/30 of the vigabatrin powder doses were within ± 10%. All naïve users delivered vigabatrin doses using VGB-RTU solution within ± 5% of the target; whereas only 13/15 delivered doses within ± 10% for vigabatrin powder. All experienced vigabatrin users delivered calculated vigabatrin doses using VGB-RTU solution within ± 3%; whereas only 10/15 delivered doses within ± 10% for vigabatrin powder. Users were equally able to accurately deliver the prescribed volumes of both products. Calculated doses of VGB-RTU solution (mg) were significantly less variable (p < 0.0001) and more accurate (p < 0.01) than doses of vigabatrin powder.
Caregivers delivered more accurate and less variable doses of the ready-to-use solution compared to solutions prepared from vigabatrin powders for oral solution. These differences were shown to be due to caregiver errors in reconstituting vigabatrin powders for oral solution.
氨己烯酸(VGB)供诊断为婴儿痉挛症(IS)的1个月至2岁婴儿的护理人员使用。市售的氨己烯酸粉末在口服前需要护理人员重新配制。本研究比较了护理人员在没有医疗专业人员指导的情况下,使用即用型(RTU)氨己烯酸口服溶液(VGB-RTU溶液)和Lundbeck LLC的口服溶液用Sabril(氨己烯酸)粉末(氨己烯酸粉末)准确提供目标剂量氨己烯酸的能力。
对30名非专业使用者(15名有氨己烯酸粉末使用经验的护理人员和15名对口服注射器/药物配制无经验的使用者)进行交叉比较可用性研究,要求使用者将单剂量的VGB-RTU替代溶液和氨己烯酸粉末输送到样品收集瓶中。通过分析测量剂量,主要终点是输送的剂量在目标剂量1125mg的±10%范围内。
所有30名参与者给予的VGB-RTU溶液剂量在目标剂量的±5%范围内,而氨己烯酸粉末剂量只有23/30在±10%范围内。所有无经验的使用者使用VGB-RTU溶液给予的氨己烯酸剂量在目标剂量的±5%范围内;而氨己烯酸粉末只有13/15的剂量在±10%范围内。所有有氨己烯酸使用经验的使用者使用VGB-RTU溶液给予的计算氨己烯酸剂量在±3%范围内;而氨己烯酸粉末只有10/15的剂量在±10%范围内。使用者同样能够准确输送两种产品的规定体积。计算得到的VGB-RTU溶液剂量(mg)的变异性显著更小(p<0.0001),且比氨己烯酸粉末剂量更准确(p<0.01)。
与由口服溶液用氨己烯酸粉末配制的溶液相比,护理人员给予的即用型溶液剂量更准确且变异性更小。这些差异表明是由于护理人员在配制口服溶液用氨己烯酸粉末时出现的错误。