Logo - International Journal of Pharmaceutical Compounding

Single Center Experience with Robot Technologies for Sterile Compounding: A Retrospective Review

Author(s):  Milibari Loay, Cotugno Michael, Belisle Caryn, Rocchio Megan, Patterson Robert F, Chacon Pablo, Fanikos John, Vo Peter

Issue:  Jul/Aug 2020 - Volume 24, Number 4
View All Articles in Issue

Abstract:  The compounding of sterile medication admixtures is a labor-intensive process and subject to potential human error. The addition of robotic devices and workflow technology may mitigate some of the challenges of compounding sterile product admixtures, especially for those associated with antineoplastic and hazardous medications. This article discusses the single-center experiences from October 2009 through August 2017 with various sterile compounding robotic technologies. The robotic devices included Intellifill  i.v., Cytocare, i.v.Station, i.v.Station ONCO, and i.v.Soft Assist. The objective of this analysis was to describe the experience with robotic technology and workflow devices in compounding sterile medication admixtures. The number of prepared doses for each device was tracked, and each device had a tool to validate the dose accuracy via specific gravity measurement. Nonhazardous preparations with a dose variation of > (+/- 10%) were considered failures. For hazardous medications, variation of > (+/- 5%) was considered a failure. Doses that were prepared manually were also analyzed. The Intellifill i.v. robot was used to compound more than 1,000,000 admixtures (75% of all compounded  products). The i.v.Station, Cytocare, i.v.Station  ONCO, and i.v.Soft Assist robots compounded 14%, 7%,  3%, and 0.7% of the total chemotherapy doses required. Identified barriers to optimal performance included device (hardware) and software failures as well as shortages with specific fluid and drug containers. The qualitative analysis was done for 36 drugs that were prepared using i.v.Station and i.v.Station ONCO. The passing rate was estimated to be 95%. Barriers to use the device included lack of the appropriate medication container, diluent supplies issues, and software failure. Robotic devices and workflow technology for compounding sterile medication admixtures were unable to produce all routine parenteral doses required daily.

Related Keywords: Loay Milibari, PharmD, Michael Cotugno, BS, Caryn Belisle, BS, MBA, Megan Rocchio, PharmD, BCPS, Robert F. Patterson, CPT, Pablo Chacon, CPT, John Fanikos, BS, MBA, Peter Vo, PharmD, compounded sterile preparations, drug admixtures, robotic devices, workflow technology, hazardous drugs, parenteral preparations, sterile compounding, compounding error prevention, quality control, academic medical center, drug costs, technical malfunctions, device downtime

Related Categories: PEER-REVIEWED, STERILE PREPARATIONS, TECHNOLOGY

Purchase this article for download in electronic PDF format from IJPC at for $35 at:
http://www.ijpc.com/Products/ProductAddToCart.cfm?PID=4833

Search the entire IJPC archive by keyword, topic, or issue at:
http://ijpc.com/Products