Perception, knowledge and protective practices for surgical staff handling antineoplastic drugs during HIPEC and PIPAC.

IF 1.4 Q4 ONCOLOGY Pleura and Peritoneum Pub Date : 2022-04-13 eCollection Date: 2022-06-01 DOI:10.1515/pp-2021-0151
Hubert Benoist, Clarisse Eveno, Sarah Wilson, Nicolas Vigneron, Jean-Marc Guilloit, Rémy Morello, Nicolas Simon, Pascal Odou, Guillaume Saint-Lorant
{"title":"Perception, knowledge and protective practices for surgical staff handling antineoplastic drugs during HIPEC and PIPAC.","authors":"Hubert Benoist,&nbsp;Clarisse Eveno,&nbsp;Sarah Wilson,&nbsp;Nicolas Vigneron,&nbsp;Jean-Marc Guilloit,&nbsp;Rémy Morello,&nbsp;Nicolas Simon,&nbsp;Pascal Odou,&nbsp;Guillaume Saint-Lorant","doi":"10.1515/pp-2021-0151","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Two surgical techniques used for peritoneal metastasis involve a risk of exposure to antineoplastic drugs (ADs): hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). The objective of this study was to assess the differences in perception, training, and knowledge of the risks as well as in the protection practices and occupational exposures of all worker categories.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This descriptive study, led in two hospitals from two distant French regions, was performed through a face-to-face interview and assessed the perception, knowledge and handling practices of ADs by a questionnaire consisting of 52 questions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Fifty-one professionals participated in this survey. A total of 29.4% (n=15) professionals were afraid to handle ADs. Very few workers have been trained on handling ADs during initial training dedicated to all caregiver (5.9%; n=3). HIPEC is considered to involve a higher risk of exposure to ADs than PIPAC (81.6% (n=31) vs. 57.9% (n=22), respectively, p=0.022, agreement 65.8%). Protective equipment is considered to be less suitable for HIPEC than for PIPAC (29% (n=11) vs. 10.5% (n=4), respectively, p=0.016, agreement 81.6%). Concerning the potential AD contamination location, the participants identified a significant difference between these two practices. During HIPEC, 15.7% (n=6) of caregivers indicated that they had negative symptoms perceived in their practice vs. 2.6% (n=1) during PIPAC.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This study shows that perception, knowledge and protection practices are different between HIPEC and PIPAC. It also shows a difference between the worker categories. In view of the difficulties in making operating room staff available, the related training programmes must have an adapted format.</p>","PeriodicalId":20231,"journal":{"name":"Pleura and Peritoneum","volume":"7 2","pages":"77-86"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9166181/pdf/","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pleura and Peritoneum","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/pp-2021-0151","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/6/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objectives: Two surgical techniques used for peritoneal metastasis involve a risk of exposure to antineoplastic drugs (ADs): hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) and pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (PIPAC). The objective of this study was to assess the differences in perception, training, and knowledge of the risks as well as in the protection practices and occupational exposures of all worker categories.

Methods: This descriptive study, led in two hospitals from two distant French regions, was performed through a face-to-face interview and assessed the perception, knowledge and handling practices of ADs by a questionnaire consisting of 52 questions.

Results: Fifty-one professionals participated in this survey. A total of 29.4% (n=15) professionals were afraid to handle ADs. Very few workers have been trained on handling ADs during initial training dedicated to all caregiver (5.9%; n=3). HIPEC is considered to involve a higher risk of exposure to ADs than PIPAC (81.6% (n=31) vs. 57.9% (n=22), respectively, p=0.022, agreement 65.8%). Protective equipment is considered to be less suitable for HIPEC than for PIPAC (29% (n=11) vs. 10.5% (n=4), respectively, p=0.016, agreement 81.6%). Concerning the potential AD contamination location, the participants identified a significant difference between these two practices. During HIPEC, 15.7% (n=6) of caregivers indicated that they had negative symptoms perceived in their practice vs. 2.6% (n=1) during PIPAC.

Conclusions: This study shows that perception, knowledge and protection practices are different between HIPEC and PIPAC. It also shows a difference between the worker categories. In view of the difficulties in making operating room staff available, the related training programmes must have an adapted format.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
手术人员在HIPEC和PIPAC期间使用抗肿瘤药物的认知、知识和防护措施。
目的:两种用于腹膜转移的手术技术涉及暴露于抗肿瘤药物(ADs)的风险:高温腹腔化疗(HIPEC)和加压腹腔气溶胶化疗(PIPAC)。本研究的目的是评估所有工人类别对风险的认知、培训和知识的差异,以及保护实践和职业暴露。方法:本描述性研究在法国两个偏远地区的两家医院进行,采用面对面访谈的方式,通过52个问题的问卷调查来评估患者对ad的认知、知识和处理方式。结果:51名专业人士参与了本次调查。共有29.4% (n=15)的专业人员害怕处理ad。在针对所有护理人员的初始培训中,很少有工作人员接受过处理ad的培训(5.9%;n = 3)。HIPEC被认为比PIPAC涉及更高的ADs暴露风险(分别为81.6% (n=31)对57.9% (n=22), p=0.022,一致性为65.8%)。防护装备被认为比PIPAC更不适合HIPEC(分别为29% (n=11)和10.5% (n=4), p=0.016,一致性为81.6%)。关于潜在的AD污染位置,参与者确定了这两种做法之间的显著差异。在HIPEC期间,15.7% (n=6)的护理人员表示他们在实践中感觉到阴性症状,而在PIPAC期间,这一比例为2.6% (n=1)。结论:本研究表明HIPEC与PIPAC在认知、知识和保护实践方面存在差异。它还显示了工人类别之间的差异。鉴于在提供手术室工作人员方面存在困难,有关的培训方案必须采用适当的形式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.50
自引率
11.10%
发文量
23
审稿时长
9 weeks
期刊最新文献
Combined Nabpaclitaxel pressurized intraPeritoneal aerosol chemotherapy with systemic Nabpaclitaxel-Gemcitabine chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer peritoneal metastases: protocol of single-arm, open-label, phase II trial (Nab-PIPAC trial). Thromboelastogram changes are associated with postoperative complications after cytoreductive surgery. Impact of laparoscopic ultrasound during PIPAC directed treatment of unresectable peritoneal metastasis. In vitro 3D microfluidic peritoneal metastatic colorectal cancer model for testing different oxaliplatin-based HIPEC regimens. Ascites does not accompany pleural effusion developing under dasatinib therapy in patients with CML-CP.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1