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...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Quentin Dubray, Taibou Diallo, Richard Loeuillet, Emilie Andre, Anne-Sophie Fauqueur, Sandrine Poil, Nathalie Thromas, Philippe-Henri Secretan, Salvatore Cisternino, Joël Schlatter
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2019-07-01
Series:SAGE Open Medicine
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/2050312119866970
Description
Summary: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.
ISSN:2050-3121