Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs: Safety assessment in a European Comprehensive Cancer Centre using the risk matrix approach.

AIMS: The purpose of this work was to assess failures in the advanced prescription of parenteral anticancer agents in an adult day oncology care unit with more than 100 patients per day. METHODS: An a priori descriptive analysis was carried out by using the risk matrix approach. After defining the scope in a multidisciplinary meeting, we determined at each step the failure modes (FMs), their effects (E) and their associated causes (C). A severity score (S) was assigned to all effects and a probability of occurrence (O) to all causes. These S and O indicators, were used to obtain a criticality index (CI) matrix. We assessed the risk control (RC) of each failure in order to define a residual criticality index (rCI) matrix. RESULTS: During risk analysis, 14 FMs were detected, and 61 scenarios were identified considering all possible effects and causes. Nine situations (15%) were highlighted with the maximum CI, 18 (30%) with a medium CI, and 34 (55%) with a negligible CI. Nevertheless, among all these critical situations, only three (5%) had an rCI to process (i.e., missed dose adjustment, multiple prescriptions and abnormal biology data); the others required monitoring only. Clinicians' and pharmacists' knowledge of these critical situations enables them to manage the associated risks. CONCLUSIONS: Advanced prescription of injectable anticancer drugs appears to be a safe practice for patients when combined with risk management. The major risks identified concerned missed dose adjustment, prescription duplication and lack of consideration for abnormal biology data.

Errors in prescribing injectable anticancer drugs: benefits of a pharmaceutical long-term monitoring to improve patient safety in a European comprehensive cancer centre.

OBJECTIVES: We aimed to assess the impact of pharmacist interventions on injectable chemotherapy prescription and the safety of early prescription practice in an adult daily care unit. METHODS: Prescription errors were recorded before and after implementing corrective measures. Errors identified from the pre-intervention period (i) were analysed to identify areas for improvement. During the post-intervention period (ii) we compared the errors in anticipated prescription (AP) with those in real-time prescriptions (RTP). We performed Chi-square statistical tests (α=0.05). RESULTS: Before implementing corrective measures (i), 377 errors were recorded (ie, 3.02% of prescriptions). After the implementation of corrective measures (ii), there was a significant decrease in errors, with 94 errors recorded (ie, 1.20% of prescriptions). The error rate in AP and RTP groups was 1.34% and 1.02%, respectively, without a significant difference between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: This study highlights the importance of prescription review, as well as collaboration between pharmacists and physicians, in reducing prescription errors, whether these prescriptions were anticipated or not.

Application of an Environmental Monitoring to Assess the Practices and Control the Risk of Occupational Exposure to Cyclophosphamide in Two Sites of a French Comprehensive Cancer Center.

OBJECTIVES: The risk of chronic exposure to antineoplastic agents in hospitals, mainly by skin contact with contaminated surfaces, is well established. The aim of this study was to assess indirectly the risk of occupational exposure to antineoplastics drugs at two hospitals by using an environmental monitoring, and to suggest ways of improving the exposure to healthcare workers. METHODS: An observational study of care practices on both sites was carried out. A wipe sampling campaign was then designed to study environmental contamination throughout the chemotherapy process: receipt, storage, compounding, transport, administration, and elimination areas. Samples were analyzed by a validated LC-MS/MS method allowing trace quantification of cyclophosphamide. A guidance 'safe value' of 0.10 ng/cm2 was considered. RESULTS: A total of 293 samples were analyzed, of which 58% were found to be positive. In the compounding units, the drug vials were contaminated before [range = (non-quantifiable [NQ]-0.71) ng/cm2] and after cleaning procedure [(NQ-0.62) ng/cm2], particularly when the flip-off lid was removed during cleaning. The contamination found on manual preparations was operator-dependent: [non-detectable (ND)-3.51] ng/cm2 on infusion bag surfaces; (780.61-24 698.98) ng/cm2 on medication ports. In the case of automated preparations, the average contamination was higher on infusion bag surfaces [(2.43-36.86) ng/cm2] and lower on medication ports [(0.43-7.65) ng/cm2] than manual preparations. Contamination of the analytical control area was also highlighted. In the daily care unit, the contamination was located near the infusion area (armchairs, infusion stands, floor, and patient toilets), and varied somewhat between the two sites, especially on the floor with (0.46-27.32) compared to (ND-0.18) ng/cm2. We did not detect contamination on the transport boxes, on the door handles or in the disposal areas. CONCLUSIONS: The variability of contamination observed between the two sites can be explained in part by the difference in routine practices, especially training of the staff, and cleaning procedures. Findings were communicated to healthcare workers, and news interventions were implemented based on wipe sampling results. This study demonstrated a method for routine environmental monitoring and worker education as a strategy to reduce occupational exposure.