ArticleEuropean journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice2022
Determination of the cross-contamination and validation of the cleaning process for an automated personalised dosing system.
Article in European journal of hospital pharmacy : science and practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo determine the degree of cross-contamination and to validate a cleaning process for an Automated Personalised Dosing System (APDS), respecting the permitted residue transfer limits.
methodAn analytical determination by high pressure liquid chromatography with mass spectrometry was performed for 11 drugs considered critical for their potential for contamination, toxicity (National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) List 2016) and/or narrow therapeutic index. The test was carried out for three consecutive weeks, seven repetitions per week, in a state of maximum contamination and maximum cleanliness. The main validation criterion of the cleaning protocol was to quantify that the active ingredients measured were below the Permitted Daily Exposure index or fraction 1/1000 of the minimum daily dose, both in a state of maximum contamination and when the APDS is in a clean condition, for an average number of tablets consumed per person per day.
resultsIn all the samples analysed, some compound could always be quantified below 2% of the permitted transfer limits, highlighting the presence of paracetamol and carbamazepine. In the state of maximum contamination, the mean±SD values of paracetamol and carbamazepine were 5.83±1.56 µg and 0.22±0.07 µg, respectively, without significant differences in mean values over the 3 weeks of the study. After the cleaning protocol was executed, only paracetamol and carbamazepine were detected, with the average values being 4.67 µg (95% CI 3.92 to 5.43, p<0.05) and 0.07 µg (95% CI 0.03 to 0.10, p<0.05) lower than the state of maximum contamination, respectively.
conclusionsIn all cases the level of cross-contamination for an APDS was below the pre-established limits. The cleaning protocol has been validated, confirming APDS decontamination of the most critical medicines.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.