Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28841099›Full record

ArticleJournal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners2019

Survey of guidelines and current practices for safe handling of antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs used in 24 countries.

Patricia I Mathias, Barbara A MacKenzie, Christine A Toennis, Thomas H Connor

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. A critical appraisal of South African oncology pharmacy standards: A comparison with international best practice standards.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2026
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Longitudinal evaluation of environmental contamination with hazardous drugs by surface wipe sampling.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2024
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Evaluation of long-term data on surface contamination by antineoplastic drugs in pharmacies.International archives of occupational and environmental health · 2023
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Carcinogenic drug exposure among health-sector workers: the need for exposure assessment and surveillance.Revista panamericana de salud publica = Pan American journal of public health · 2023
    Article
  16. Validation of chemotherapy drug vapor containment of an air cleaning closed-system drug transfer device.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  17. Closed-system transfer device use with oncology biologics: A survey of Canadian healthcare practitioners.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2022
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Evaluation of the efficacy of a self-cleaning automated compounding system for the decontamination of cytotoxic drugs.Journal of oncology pharmacy practice : official publication of the International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners · 2021
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Patricia I MathiasRobert A. Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Cincinnati, USA.
Barbara A MacKenzieRobert A. Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Cincinnati, USA.
Christine A ToennisRobert A. Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Cincinnati, USA.
Thomas H ConnorRobert A. Taft Laboratories, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Cincinnati, USA.

Funding

Intramural CDC HHS CC999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeA survey of guidelines and current practices was conducted to examine the safe handling procedures for antineoplastic and other hazardous drugs that are used in 24 countries including the Americas, Europe, the Mideast, Far East, and Australia.

methodsSubject experts were asked to complete a brief survey regarding safe handling guidelines and practices for hazardous drugs in their countries. Questions addressed practices for handling monoclonal antibodies, the use of closed-system transfer devices, medical surveillance practices, and measurements of compliance with existing guidelines.

resultsResponses from 37 subject experts representing 24 countries revealed considerable variation in the content and scope of safe handling guidelines and pharmacy practices among the participating countries. Guidelines in the majority of countries used the term "cytotoxics," while others referred to "hazardous" or "antineoplastic" drugs. The International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practice standard was cited by six countries, and five cited the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health Alert. Others cited international guidelines other than International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, or they have created their own guidelines. Approximately half reported that their guidelines were mandatory under federal, state, or provincial legislation. Only 11 countries reported that monoclonal antibodies were covered in their guidelines. Closed-system drug-transfer devices are widely used, but were not specifically recommended in four countries, while one country required their use. Medical surveillance programs are in place in 20 countries, but only in The Netherlands is surveillance mandatory. Nine countries reported that they have completed recent updates or revisions of guidelines, and the measures for their adoption have been initiated.

conclusionsAlthough the overall goals in the participating countries were similar, the approaches taken to assure safe handling of hazardous drugs varied considerably in some cases.

Indexed as

InternationalitySurveys and QuestionnairesAntineoplastic AgentsAsia, EasternAustraliaEuropeGuidelines as TopicHazardous SubstancesHealth PersonnelHumansMiddle EastOccupational ExposureOccupational HealthPharmaceutical ServicesPharmaciesPharmacyAntineoplastic AgentsHazardous Substancesantineoplastic or cytotoxic drugsclosed system drug-transfer devicesmeasures of compliancemedical surveillancemonoclonal antibodiesSafe handling guidelines

Identifiers

PMID28841099
PMCPMC7895469

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.