4CPS-201 Identification of hazardous drugs and process in a university hospital

• Published in: European journal of hospital pharmacy. Science and practice Vol. 27; no. Suppl 1; p. A143
• Main Authors: Mora Herrera, C, Cuadros Martinez, C, Puivecino Moreno, C, Vazquez Vela, V
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London BMJ Publishing Group LTD 01.03.2020
• Subjects: Drugs; Identification; Workers
• ISSN: 2047-9956; 2047-9964
• DOI: 10.1136/ejhpharm-2020-eahpconf.302

Background and importanceOccupational exposure to hazardous drugs (HD) can cause damage to health in exposed healthcare professionals, so protective measures must be taken.Aim and objectivesTo identify HD included in the pharmacotherapeutic guide (GFT) of our hospital and dangerous situations to subsequently develop a safe work procedure for workers.Material and methodsWe conducted a systematic review of publications in the past 10 years in humans in the database PubMed using as MESH terms: hazardous drugs, safe handling and occupational exposure, and combining related descriptors. Inclusion criteria were a list of medications from the GFT of our hospital. The comparator was a list established by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), year 2014.ResultsThe main variable studied was identification of HD: 274 drugs with active ingredients classified as HD were detected in our GFT. In addition, despite not being in the NIOSH listings, acenocoumarol was considered a HD due to its similarity to warfarin (list 3 NIOSH). Therefore, 275 medications were included. Of these 275 drugs, corresponding to 151 active substances, 92 were included in list 1 (antineoplastic medicine), 26 in list 2 (non-antineoplastic drugs that meet at least one hazard criteria), 26 in list 3 (drugs that pose a risk to the reproductive process that may affect men/women who are actively trying to conceive, and pregnant women/breastfeeding period, but that do not pose a risk to the rest of the staff) and 7 according to the medication’s datasheet. The second variable studied was identification of processes that cause a risk to the safety of workers in contact with HD. Four processes were found: reception, transport and distribution, preparation and treatment of waste, which in the absence of specific preventive measures cause a risk to the safety and health of workers.Conclusion and relevanceThe identification of MP is a key aspect to avoid occupational risks and ensure the safety of the healthcare professional. Recent research identified dangerous situations and established an association between occupational contamination and levels of exposure to antineoplastic drugs, with the training and information of the health worker in MP matters being a crucial aspect.References and/or acknowledgementsNo conflict of interest.