Development and Evaluation of an e-Learning Module for Low- and Middle-Income Countries on the Safe Handling of Chemotherapy Drugs.

Despite the growing use of chemotherapy drugs in resource-constrained settings, training opportunities on safe handling practices are lacking. This study's objectives were to develop and evaluate an e-learning training module on the safe handling of chemotherapy drugs to strengthen knowledge and practices in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The module's curriculum was developed using the Six-Step Approach for Curriculum Development for Medical Education. Asynchronous, self-paced, e-learning lessons within the module were created and uploaded onto a free online platform, Pharm-Ed. The study ran online from January to April 2021. Participant recruitment was done using convenience sampling through various channels (social media, communities of practice). Training module effectiveness was evaluated using knowledge assessments (a pre-test and post-test study design) and participant satisfaction. We developed a comprehensive e-learning module on the safe handling of chemotherapy drugs comprising 11 asynchronous, self-paced, e-learning lessons. Eighty-two participants (68% pharmacists and 17% pharmacy students) from 17 countries completed at least one lesson, with a total of 259 lessons completed. Evaluation of the different lessons showed significant improvements in theoretical knowledge (p < 0.01) in all except one lesson and a high degree of participant satisfaction. As the use of anti-cancer drugs in LMICs will continue to increase, this e-learning module is an effective means to address the lack of training opportunities on the safe handling of chemotherapies for healthcare workers in these countries. The module could be integrated into a multi-modal approach aimed at reducing occupational exposure and increasing patient safety in cancer care centers.

Pharmacy practitioners' adherence to safe-handling practices of chemotherapeutic drugs: A cross-sectional study in Saudi Arabia.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy drug handling and occupational exposure are topics of concern for a variety of oncology health care professionals. Inappropriate handling can pose health risks to practitioners particularly, those who handle them on a daily basis. Therefore, this study aimed to assess chemotherapy handling practices among oncology pharmacists and pharmacy technicians in Saudi Arabia. METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted using an online survey with a structured pre-validated questionnaire. Data was collected from pharmacists and pharmacy technicians who handle chemotherapeutic agents in Saudi Arabia, and analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: A total of 79 oncology pharmacy practitioners responded to the survey. The majority (92.4%) had written chemotherapy guidelines at their workplaces. Almost all participants (98.7%) reported the availability of protective gloves and gowns, however, the availability of eye protection was only 57%. Most used chemotherapy-designated gloves (83.6%), and gowns (86.1%). However, 54.4% have reused disposable gowns. The extent of utilization of most protective equipment ranged from 70% (always using closed system transfer device) to 98% (always using shoe cover); while the practice of always using eye protection and face shield was only 30.4% and 38%, respectively. With regard to cleaning practice, the work area was cleaned at least once a day by 35%; monthly decontamination (77%); certification by the biomedical department every 6 months (67%) and at least yearly (95%). Accidental exposure was reported by 28%, and the most common adverse effect was skin irritation (82%). There was no workplace medical surveillance available for 50%. The majority (88.6%) received relevant training, but not periodic updates on their training (38%). The main barriers against the use of personal protective equipment were: that some personal protective equipments were not always available (38%), and personal protective equipments were too uncomfortable to use (30.4%). The demographic variables did not have a statistically significant effect (p > 0.05) on the responses except for type of institution (workplace) on some of the cleaning practices that showed significant differences namely, the monthly decontamination and certification by the biomedical department. CONCLUSIONS: Most protective equipment and chemotherapy guidelines were available, and the majority of pharmacy practitioners adhered to many aspects of chemotherapy safe-handling practices. Nevertheless, some areas such as medical surveillance programs, use of eye protection and face shields, the practice of re-using disposable gowns, some of the barriers against personal protective equipment use, and the provision of periodic training need improvement for better protection of the health care professionals.

The safe handling of chemotherapy drugs in low- and middle-income countries: An overview of practices.

INTRODUCTION: The rising burden of cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) has led to substantial efforts to improve access to chemotherapy. The present study's objectives were to obtain an overview of the safe handling practices implemented in LMICs' healthcare facilities when dealing with chemotherapy drugs and to prioritize opportunities for improving them. METHODS: We conducted an online survey, from June 2018 to April 2019, among LMIC healthcare facilities dealing with chemotherapy drugs. Facilities were asked to self-assess their chemotherapy handling processes using Cyto-SAT, a self-assessment tool incorporating 134 items organized into 10 domains (management, personnel, logistics, prescription, preparation, administration, incident management, waste management, cleaning, and patient counselling). Data were recorded on an online platform (www.datapharma.ch/cyto-SAT). RESULTS: The survey enrolled 53 healthcare facilities (15 from low-income, 26 from lower-middle-income, and 12 from upper-middle-income countries). The median level of implementation of safe practices was 63% (Q1:39%-Q3:77%). Facilities in low-income countries (LICs) reported lower median levels of safe practices than middle-income countries (MICs) [LICs: 32% (Q1:24%-Q3:62%), Lower-MICs: 63% (Q1:49%-Q3:70%), Upper-MICs: 85% (Q1:77%-Q3:93%)]. The biggest differences between country categories were observed in the domains related to personnel, preparation processes, and incident management. CONCLUSION: This overview of practices highlighted a large variability and major gaps in the safe handling of chemotherapy drugs in LMICs. Improvement strategies are needed to increase patient and staff safety and limit environmental contamination, especially in LICs. Safe handling programs should be part of continuing efforts to improve access to quality cancer drugs and should be integrated into national cancer control programs.

Effects of organizational safety practices and perceived safety climate on PPE usage, engineering controls, and adverse events involving liquid antineoplastic drugs among nurses.

Antineoplastic drugs pose risks to the healthcare workers who handle them. This fact notwithstanding, adherence to safe handling guidelines remains inconsistent and often poor. This study examined the effects of pertinent organizational safety practices and perceived safety climate on the use of personal protective equipment, engineering controls, and adverse events (spill/leak or skin contact) involving liquid antineoplastic drugs. Data for this study came from the 2011 National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) Health and Safety Practices Survey of Healthcare Workers which included a sample of approximately 1,800 nurses who had administered liquid antineoplastic drugs during the past seven days. Regression modeling was used to examine predictors of personal protective equipment use, engineering controls, and adverse events involving antineoplastic drugs. Approximately 14% of nurses reported experiencing an adverse event while administering antineoplastic drugs during the previous week. Usage of recommended engineering controls and personal protective equipment was quite variable. Usage of both was better in non-profit and government settings, when workers were more familiar with safe handling guidelines, and when perceived management commitment to safety was higher. Usage was poorer in the absence of specific safety handling procedures. The odds of adverse events increased with number of antineoplastic drugs treatments and when antineoplastic drugs were administered more days of the week. The odds of such events were significantly lower when the use of engineering controls and personal protective equipment was greater and when more precautionary measures were in place. Greater levels of management commitment to safety and perceived risk were also related to lower odds of adverse events. These results point to the value of implementing a comprehensive health and safety program that utilizes available hazard controls and effectively communicates and demonstrates the importance of safe handling practices. Such actions also contribute to creating a positive safety climate.

Adherence to Precautionary Guidelines for Compounding Antineoplastic Drugs: A Survey of Nurses and Pharmacy Practitioners.

Precautionary guidelines detailing standards of practice and equipment to eliminate or minimize exposure to antineoplastic drugs during handling activities have been available for nearly three decades. To evaluate practices for compounding antineoplastic drugs, the NIOSH Health and Safety Practices Survey of Healthcare Workers was conducted among members of professional practice organizations representing primarily oncology nurses, pharmacists, and pharmacy technicians. This national survey is the first in over 20 years to examine self-reported use of engineering, administrative, and work practice controls and PPE by pharmacy practitioners for minimizing exposure to antineoplastic drugs. The survey was completed by 241 nurses and 183 pharmacy practitioners who compounded antineoplastic drugs in the seven days prior to the survey. They reported: not always wearing two pairs of chemotherapy gloves (85%, 47%, respectively) or even a single pair (8%, 10%); not always using closed system drug-transfer devices (75%, 53%); not always wearing recommended gown (38%, 20%); I.V. lines sometimes/always primed with antineoplastic drug (19%, 30%); and not always using either a biological safety cabinet or isolator (9%, 15%). They also reported lack of: hazard awareness training (9%, 13%); safe handling procedures (20%, 11%); and medical surveillance programs (61%, 45%). Both employers and healthcare workers share responsibility for adhering to precautionary guidelines and other best practices. Employers can ensure that: workers are trained regularly; facility safe-handling procedures reflecting national guidelines are in place and support for their implementation is understood; engineering controls and PPE are available and workers know how to use them; and medical surveillance, exposure monitoring, and other administrative controls are in place. Workers can seek out training, understand and follow facility procedures, be role models for junior staff, ask questions, and report any safety concerns.

Adherence to safe handling guidelines by health care workers who administer antineoplastic drugs.

The toxicity of antineoplastic drugs is well documented. Many are known or suspected human carcinogens where no safe exposure level exists. Authoritative guidelines developed by professional practice organizations and federal agencies for the safe handling of these hazardous drugs have been available for nearly three decades. As a means of evaluating the extent of use of primary prevention practices such as engineering, administrative and work practice controls, personal protective equipment (PPE), and barriers to using PPE, the National Institute for Safety and Health (NIOSH) conducted a web survey of health care workers in 2011. The study population primarily included members of professional practice organizations representing health care occupations which routinely use or come in contact with selected chemical agents. All respondents who indicated that they administered antineoplastic drugs in the past week were eligible to complete a hazard module addressing self-reported health and safety practices on this topic. Most (98%) of the 2069 respondents of this module were nurses. Working primarily in hospitals, outpatient care centers, and physician offices, respondents reported that they had collectively administered over 90 specific antineoplastic drugs in the past week, with carboplatin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel the most common. Examples of activities which increase exposure risk, expressed as percent of respondents, included: failure to wear nonabsorbent gown with closed front and tight cuffs (42%); intravenous (I.V.) tubing primed with antineoplastic drug by respondent (6%) or by pharmacy (12%); potentially contaminated clothing taken home (12%); spill or leak of antineoplastic drug during administration (12%); failure to wear chemotherapy gloves (12%); and lack of hazard awareness training (4%). The most common reason for not wearing gloves or gowns was "skin exposure was minimal"; 4% of respondents, however, reported skin contact during handling and administration. Despite the longstanding availability of safe handling guidance, recommended practices are not always followed, underscoring the importance of training and education for employers and workers.

NanoSafe III: A User Friendly Safety Management System for Nanomaterials in Laboratories and Small Facilities.

Research in nanoscience continues to bring forward a steady stream of new nanomaterials and processes that are being developed and marketed. While scientific committees and expert groups deal with the harmonization of terminology and legal challenges, risk assessors in research labs continue to have to deal with the gap between regulations and rapidly developing information. The risk assessment of nanomaterial processes is currently slow and tedious because it is performed on a material-by-material basis. Safety data sheets are rarely available for (new) nanomaterials, and even when they are, they often lack nano-specific information. Exposure estimations or measurements are difficult to perform and require sophisticated and expensive equipment and personal expertise. The use of banding-based risk assessment tools for laboratory environments is an efficient way to evaluate the occupational risks associated with nanomaterials. Herein, we present an updated version of our risk assessment tool for working with nanomaterials based on a three-step control banding approach and the precautionary principle. The first step is to determine the hazard band of the nanomaterial. A decision tree allows the assignment of the material to one of three bands based on known or expected effects on human health. In the second step, the work exposure is evaluated and the processes are classified into three "nano" levels for each specific hazard band. The work exposure is estimated using a laboratory exposure model. The result of this calculation in combination with recommended occupational exposure limits (rOEL) for nanomaterials and an additional safety factor gives the final "nano" level. Finally, we update the technical, organizational, and personal protective measures to allow nanomaterial processes to be established in research environments.

Personal Protective Equipment: Evaluating Usage Among Inpatient and Outpatient Oncology Nurses.

BACKGROUND: Chemotherapy agents have long been considered hazardous, and safety for healthcare providers when administering these drugs is a primary concern. Personal protective equipment (PPE) is known to decrease exposure to hazardous drugs. Studies report that PPE is underused among healthcare providers in inpatient and outpatient settings. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to examine the use of PPE among inpatient and outpatient nurses while administering hazardous chemotherapy agents. METHODS: This cross-sectional, descriptive study used the Hazardous Drug Handling Questionnaire (HDHQ) to measure nurses' self-reported use of PPE. FINDINGS: Results of the HDHQ indicated that nurses are not using PPE as recommended by hazardous drug administration guidelines. Interventions for proper PPE usage include interprofessional collaboration among oncology nurses, administrators, organizations, and healthcare systems to ensure the safety of healthcare providers, patients, and family caregivers.