Loading…

I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom

The contamination rates associated with the preparation of medium-risk i.v. admixtures in a traditional practice site and in a class 1000 cleanroom were compared. Simulated product media fills served as the samples. Each investigator, a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician, prepared 500 vials and 50...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:American journal of health-system pharmacy 2005-11, Vol.62 (22), p.2386-2392
Main Authors: Thomas, Mark, Sanborn, Michael D, Couldry, Rick
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93
container_end_page 2392
container_issue 22
container_start_page 2386
container_title American journal of health-system pharmacy
container_volume 62
creator Thomas, Mark
Sanborn, Michael D
Couldry, Rick
description The contamination rates associated with the preparation of medium-risk i.v. admixtures in a traditional practice site and in a class 1000 cleanroom were compared. Simulated product media fills served as the samples. Each investigator, a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician, prepared 500 vials and 500 small-volume parenteral (SVP) bags in five separate runs at a traditional practice site and in a cleanroom. United States Pharmacopeia chapter 797 medium-risk compounding procedures were followed, and strict adherence to aseptic technique was employed. Single-strength tryptic soy broth was substituted for the drug and diluent in the admixtures. Positive and negative controls were also prepared and stored for the duration of the study. The pharmacist and technician prepared a total of 4057 samples: 2027 samples (1014 vials and 1013 SVP bags) were prepared in a class 1000 cleanroom, and 2030 (1014 vials and 1016 SVP bags) were prepared at a traditional practice site. Contamination rates did not significantly differ between the traditional practice site (0.296%) and the cleanroom environment (0.344%) (p = 1.0). A significant difference in the number of contaminated samples was found between the two investigators (2 of 2057 were contaminated by the pharmacist and 11 of 2000 were contaminated by the technician) (p = 0.012). Contamination rates by the pharmacist (p = 1.0) and technician (p = 1.0) did not significantly differ between sites. The most important variable affecting microbial contamination of admixtures was the aseptic technique of personnel, not the environment in which the drugs were compounded.
doi_str_mv 10.2146/ajhp050078
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68775371</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>19821987</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkM1rGzEQxUVpSJyPS_-AolMDhXVG0q6kzS2YNA0Eckl6yUHMSnItsx-OtBsn_30VbPCxMMM8hh8P3iPkG4M5Z6W8wvVqAxWA0l_IjFWiKngN8DVrUHXBQfMTcprSGoBxDfKYnDDJlRYCZuTlfv5nTtF14X2coqd26EfsQo9jGHoacfTpmj5FdOHzgS3dRLRjsJ6mMHr65mOaEkVqW0yJMgDI0mMfh6E7J0dLbJO_2N8z8vzr9mnxu3h4vLtf3DwUVpR6LFS1tKyshKyaWjVcN0JL3Sx5UwpWCmeta9BVzkmnHdcyZ1IClNV1XUvhsRZn5MfOdxOH18mn0XQhWd-22PthSkZqpSqh2H9BVmueV2Xw5w60cUgp-qXZxNBh_DAMzGfn5tB5hr_vXaem8-6A7kvOwOUOWIW_q22I3qQO2zbj3Gy3W8kNz5NTi39GCYlW</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>19821987</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Thomas, Mark ; Sanborn, Michael D ; Couldry, Rick</creator><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Mark ; Sanborn, Michael D ; Couldry, Rick</creatorcontrib><description>The contamination rates associated with the preparation of medium-risk i.v. admixtures in a traditional practice site and in a class 1000 cleanroom were compared. Simulated product media fills served as the samples. Each investigator, a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician, prepared 500 vials and 500 small-volume parenteral (SVP) bags in five separate runs at a traditional practice site and in a cleanroom. United States Pharmacopeia chapter 797 medium-risk compounding procedures were followed, and strict adherence to aseptic technique was employed. Single-strength tryptic soy broth was substituted for the drug and diluent in the admixtures. Positive and negative controls were also prepared and stored for the duration of the study. The pharmacist and technician prepared a total of 4057 samples: 2027 samples (1014 vials and 1013 SVP bags) were prepared in a class 1000 cleanroom, and 2030 (1014 vials and 1016 SVP bags) were prepared at a traditional practice site. Contamination rates did not significantly differ between the traditional practice site (0.296%) and the cleanroom environment (0.344%) (p = 1.0). A significant difference in the number of contaminated samples was found between the two investigators (2 of 2057 were contaminated by the pharmacist and 11 of 2000 were contaminated by the technician) (p = 0.012). Contamination rates by the pharmacist (p = 1.0) and technician (p = 1.0) did not significantly differ between sites. The most important variable affecting microbial contamination of admixtures was the aseptic technique of personnel, not the environment in which the drugs were compounded.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1079-2082</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1535-2900</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2146/ajhp050078</identifier><identifier>PMID: 16278330</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: American Society of Health-System Pharmacists</publisher><subject>Asepsis - methods ; Drug Compounding - methods ; Drug Contamination - prevention &amp; control ; Environment, Controlled ; Humans ; Injections, Intravenous ; Pharmacists ; Pharmacy Technicians ; Professional Competence</subject><ispartof>American journal of health-system pharmacy, 2005-11, Vol.62 (22), p.2386-2392</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16278330$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanborn, Michael D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Couldry, Rick</creatorcontrib><title>I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom</title><title>American journal of health-system pharmacy</title><addtitle>Am J Health Syst Pharm</addtitle><description>The contamination rates associated with the preparation of medium-risk i.v. admixtures in a traditional practice site and in a class 1000 cleanroom were compared. Simulated product media fills served as the samples. Each investigator, a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician, prepared 500 vials and 500 small-volume parenteral (SVP) bags in five separate runs at a traditional practice site and in a cleanroom. United States Pharmacopeia chapter 797 medium-risk compounding procedures were followed, and strict adherence to aseptic technique was employed. Single-strength tryptic soy broth was substituted for the drug and diluent in the admixtures. Positive and negative controls were also prepared and stored for the duration of the study. The pharmacist and technician prepared a total of 4057 samples: 2027 samples (1014 vials and 1013 SVP bags) were prepared in a class 1000 cleanroom, and 2030 (1014 vials and 1016 SVP bags) were prepared at a traditional practice site. Contamination rates did not significantly differ between the traditional practice site (0.296%) and the cleanroom environment (0.344%) (p = 1.0). A significant difference in the number of contaminated samples was found between the two investigators (2 of 2057 were contaminated by the pharmacist and 11 of 2000 were contaminated by the technician) (p = 0.012). Contamination rates by the pharmacist (p = 1.0) and technician (p = 1.0) did not significantly differ between sites. The most important variable affecting microbial contamination of admixtures was the aseptic technique of personnel, not the environment in which the drugs were compounded.</description><subject>Asepsis - methods</subject><subject>Drug Compounding - methods</subject><subject>Drug Contamination - prevention &amp; control</subject><subject>Environment, Controlled</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Injections, Intravenous</subject><subject>Pharmacists</subject><subject>Pharmacy Technicians</subject><subject>Professional Competence</subject><issn>1079-2082</issn><issn>1535-2900</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2005</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkM1rGzEQxUVpSJyPS_-AolMDhXVG0q6kzS2YNA0Eckl6yUHMSnItsx-OtBsn_30VbPCxMMM8hh8P3iPkG4M5Z6W8wvVqAxWA0l_IjFWiKngN8DVrUHXBQfMTcprSGoBxDfKYnDDJlRYCZuTlfv5nTtF14X2coqd26EfsQo9jGHoacfTpmj5FdOHzgS3dRLRjsJ6mMHr65mOaEkVqW0yJMgDI0mMfh6E7J0dLbJO_2N8z8vzr9mnxu3h4vLtf3DwUVpR6LFS1tKyshKyaWjVcN0JL3Sx5UwpWCmeta9BVzkmnHdcyZ1IClNV1XUvhsRZn5MfOdxOH18mn0XQhWd-22PthSkZqpSqh2H9BVmueV2Xw5w60cUgp-qXZxNBh_DAMzGfn5tB5hr_vXaem8-6A7kvOwOUOWIW_q22I3qQO2zbj3Gy3W8kNz5NTi39GCYlW</recordid><startdate>20051115</startdate><enddate>20051115</enddate><creator>Thomas, Mark</creator><creator>Sanborn, Michael D</creator><creator>Couldry, Rick</creator><general>American Society of Health-System Pharmacists</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20051115</creationdate><title>I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom</title><author>Thomas, Mark ; Sanborn, Michael D ; Couldry, Rick</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2005</creationdate><topic>Asepsis - methods</topic><topic>Drug Compounding - methods</topic><topic>Drug Contamination - prevention &amp; control</topic><topic>Environment, Controlled</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Injections, Intravenous</topic><topic>Pharmacists</topic><topic>Pharmacy Technicians</topic><topic>Professional Competence</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Thomas, Mark</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sanborn, Michael D</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Couldry, Rick</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>American journal of health-system pharmacy</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Thomas, Mark</au><au>Sanborn, Michael D</au><au>Couldry, Rick</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom</atitle><jtitle>American journal of health-system pharmacy</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Health Syst Pharm</addtitle><date>2005-11-15</date><risdate>2005</risdate><volume>62</volume><issue>22</issue><spage>2386</spage><epage>2392</epage><pages>2386-2392</pages><issn>1079-2082</issn><eissn>1535-2900</eissn><abstract>The contamination rates associated with the preparation of medium-risk i.v. admixtures in a traditional practice site and in a class 1000 cleanroom were compared. Simulated product media fills served as the samples. Each investigator, a pharmacist and a pharmacy technician, prepared 500 vials and 500 small-volume parenteral (SVP) bags in five separate runs at a traditional practice site and in a cleanroom. United States Pharmacopeia chapter 797 medium-risk compounding procedures were followed, and strict adherence to aseptic technique was employed. Single-strength tryptic soy broth was substituted for the drug and diluent in the admixtures. Positive and negative controls were also prepared and stored for the duration of the study. The pharmacist and technician prepared a total of 4057 samples: 2027 samples (1014 vials and 1013 SVP bags) were prepared in a class 1000 cleanroom, and 2030 (1014 vials and 1016 SVP bags) were prepared at a traditional practice site. Contamination rates did not significantly differ between the traditional practice site (0.296%) and the cleanroom environment (0.344%) (p = 1.0). A significant difference in the number of contaminated samples was found between the two investigators (2 of 2057 were contaminated by the pharmacist and 11 of 2000 were contaminated by the technician) (p = 0.012). Contamination rates by the pharmacist (p = 1.0) and technician (p = 1.0) did not significantly differ between sites. The most important variable affecting microbial contamination of admixtures was the aseptic technique of personnel, not the environment in which the drugs were compounded.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>American Society of Health-System Pharmacists</pub><pmid>16278330</pmid><doi>10.2146/ajhp050078</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1079-2082
ispartof American journal of health-system pharmacy, 2005-11, Vol.62 (22), p.2386-2392
issn 1079-2082
1535-2900
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_68775371
source Oxford Journals Online
subjects Asepsis - methods
Drug Compounding - methods
Drug Contamination - prevention & control
Environment, Controlled
Humans
Injections, Intravenous
Pharmacists
Pharmacy Technicians
Professional Competence
title I.V. admixture contamination rates: Traditional practice site versus a class 1000 cleanroom
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-28T21%3A22%3A50IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=I.V.%20admixture%20contamination%20rates:%20Traditional%20practice%20site%20versus%20a%20class%201000%20cleanroom&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20health-system%20pharmacy&rft.au=Thomas,%20Mark&rft.date=2005-11-15&rft.volume=62&rft.issue=22&rft.spage=2386&rft.epage=2392&rft.pages=2386-2392&rft.issn=1079-2082&rft.eissn=1535-2900&rft_id=info:doi/10.2146/ajhp050078&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E19821987%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c348t-75fc145365b97b28b3868bf2b43143dccdbad5dd6d8d2860797307c899963ea93%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=19821987&rft_id=info:pmid/16278330&rfr_iscdi=true