Evaluation of surface contamination in a hospital hematology—oncology pharmacy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To describe environmental contamination with hazardous drugs in a hospital pharmacy setting before and after reorganizing a hematology- oncology satellite pharmacy. METHODS: This is a descriptive study of surface contamination with cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, and methotrexate in two hematology-oncology satellite pharmacies. In order to measure surface contamination with hazardous drugs, samples from four distinct measurement sites within the pharmacy were taken in each of the two phases (pre-and postphases) using a sampling procedure and an analytical method modified from Larson et al. RESULTS: A total of 133 samples from four measurement sites were taken and analyzed over the course of the study (specifically 60 prephase samples and 73 postphase samples). The study showed a significant increase in the number of positive samples (from 66.7% to 90.4%, p<0.001) from the pre- to the postphase. The increase, however, is only significant in terms of the location where completed preparations were placed after they had come out from under the hood (from 0/15 to 21/28, p<0.001) and the work surface (from 8/15 to 15/15, p=0.006) and only in terms of ifosfamide. Furthermore, for the other sites studied, the number of positive samples remained unchanged between the pre- and postphase. A statistically significant difference between the pre- and postphase was observed in terms of ifosfamide for three of the four measurement sites studied and methotrexate for one of the four sites. Average concentrations were higher in the post phase in three of the four cases. CONCLUSION: This study describes environmental contamination with hazardous drugs in a hospital pharmacy setting before and after reorganizing a hematology-oncology satellite pharmacy. The study showed that a refitting of the hemato-oncology pharmacy is not a sufficient strategy to reduce the environmental contamination by ifosfamide because a significant increase in the number of positive samples from the pre- to the postphase have been observed. Many factors can contribute to influence the contamination of hazardous drugs such as the workflow and the training of the personal. Continuous environmental surveillance of hazardous drugs is required to document traces and help reduce risks.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".