Cargando…
Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent preparation unit
OBJECTIVE: The global professional risk assessment applied to the central unit of antineoplastic agent preparations is part of a mandatory approach required by the European legislation for workers. This study identified the hazardous situations related to the staff activity and then enabled the prep...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2019
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6661790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31384466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119866970 |
_version_ | 1783439526795935744 |
---|---|
author | Dubray, Quentin Diallo, Taibou Loeuillet, Richard Andre, Emilie Fauqueur, Anne-Sophie Poil, Sandrine Thromas, Nathalie Secretan, Philippe-Henri Cisternino, Salvatore Schlatter, Joël |
author_facet | Dubray, Quentin Diallo, Taibou Loeuillet, Richard Andre, Emilie Fauqueur, Anne-Sophie Poil, Sandrine Thromas, Nathalie Secretan, Philippe-Henri Cisternino, Salvatore Schlatter, Joël |
author_sort | Dubray, Quentin |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: The global professional risk assessment applied to the central unit of antineoplastic agent preparations is part of a mandatory approach required by the European legislation for workers. This study identified the hazardous situations related to the staff activity and then enabled the preparation of a formal plan of occupational prevention. METHODS: The nature of study approved by a working group constituted by experts was the global risk analysis. After identifying the hazardous situations, the global risk analysis estimated the risk level of each hazardous situation based on a criticality score, including severity and frequency. The global risk analysis highlighted the initial and residual risks after establishing a plan to reduce the high criticality risks. RESULTS: Hence, 33 unacceptable hazardous situations were identified. The critical categories of professional risks were “Product, emissions, and waste risks” with 17 (55%) hazardous situations; “Psychosocial risk factors” with 8 (24%) hazardous situations; and “Risks related to work equipment” with 6 (18%) hazardous situations. Once the risk reduction plan was in place, all hazardous situations were considered under control. The corrective actions led to a reorganization of human resources, the update of protection protocols, and optimization of ergonomic work tools. Staff-specific medical monitoring and regular surface contamination tests have been scheduled annually. In addition, initial and continuous training, specific to product and waste risks, has been updated. CONCLUSION: The global professional risk assessment related to centralized antineoplastic agent preparation unit generated failure in our system and enabled corrective actions for staff safety. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6661790 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-66617902019-08-05 Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent preparation unit Dubray, Quentin Diallo, Taibou Loeuillet, Richard Andre, Emilie Fauqueur, Anne-Sophie Poil, Sandrine Thromas, Nathalie Secretan, Philippe-Henri Cisternino, Salvatore Schlatter, Joël SAGE Open Med Original Article OBJECTIVE: The global professional risk assessment applied to the central unit of antineoplastic agent preparations is part of a mandatory approach required by the European legislation for workers. This study identified the hazardous situations related to the staff activity and then enabled the preparation of a formal plan of occupational prevention. METHODS: The nature of study approved by a working group constituted by experts was the global risk analysis. After identifying the hazardous situations, the global risk analysis estimated the risk level of each hazardous situation based on a criticality score, including severity and frequency. The global risk analysis highlighted the initial and residual risks after establishing a plan to reduce the high criticality risks. RESULTS: Hence, 33 unacceptable hazardous situations were identified. The critical categories of professional risks were “Product, emissions, and waste risks” with 17 (55%) hazardous situations; “Psychosocial risk factors” with 8 (24%) hazardous situations; and “Risks related to work equipment” with 6 (18%) hazardous situations. Once the risk reduction plan was in place, all hazardous situations were considered under control. The corrective actions led to a reorganization of human resources, the update of protection protocols, and optimization of ergonomic work tools. Staff-specific medical monitoring and regular surface contamination tests have been scheduled annually. In addition, initial and continuous training, specific to product and waste risks, has been updated. CONCLUSION: The global professional risk assessment related to centralized antineoplastic agent preparation unit generated failure in our system and enabled corrective actions for staff safety. SAGE Publications 2019-07-27 /pmc/articles/PMC6661790/ /pubmed/31384466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119866970 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access pages (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Article Dubray, Quentin Diallo, Taibou Loeuillet, Richard Andre, Emilie Fauqueur, Anne-Sophie Poil, Sandrine Thromas, Nathalie Secretan, Philippe-Henri Cisternino, Salvatore Schlatter, Joël Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent preparation unit |
title | Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
title_full | Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
title_fullStr | Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
title_full_unstemmed | Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
title_short | Occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
title_sort | occupational risks evaluation in a centralized antineoplastic agent
preparation unit |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6661790/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31384466 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/2050312119866970 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT dubrayquentin occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT diallotaibou occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT loeuilletrichard occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT andreemilie occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT fauqueurannesophie occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT poilsandrine occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT thromasnathalie occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT secretanphilippehenri occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT cisterninosalvatore occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit AT schlatterjoel occupationalrisksevaluationinacentralizedantineoplasticagentpreparationunit |