These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.
83 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 23072203)
1. Use of a closed-system drug transfer device (PhaSeal) and impact on preparation time. Sánchez-Rubio Ferrández J; Lozano MC; Iglesias I; Sánchez-Rubio Ferrández L; Rodríguez Vargas B; Moreno Díaz R Int J Pharm Compd; 2012; 16(5):431-3. PubMed ID: 23072203 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
2. Cost savings realized by use of the PhaSeal(®) closed-system transfer device for preparation of antineoplastic agents. Edwards MS; Solimando DA; Grollman FR; Pang JL; Chasick AH; Hightman CM; Johnson AD; Mickens MG; Preston LM J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2013 Dec; 19(4):338-47. PubMed ID: 23975556 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
3. Reducing workplace cytotoxic surface contamination using a closed-system drug transfer device. Siderov J; Kirsa S; McLauchlan R J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2010 Mar; 16(1):19-25. PubMed ID: 19965949 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
4. Safe Cytotoxic Drug Preparation Using Closed-system Transfer Device: Technical and Practical Evaluation of a New Device (Vialshield/Texium) Comparatively to a Reference One (Phaseal). Garrigue P; Montana M; Ventre C; Savry A; Gauthier-Villano L; Pisano P; Pourroy B Int J Pharm Compd; 2016; 20(2):148-54. PubMed ID: 27323425 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
5. The PhaSeal® system: impact of its use on workplace contamination and duration of chemotherapy preparation. Favier B; Labrosse H; Gilles-Afchain L; Cropet C; Perol D; Chaumard N; Latour JF; Hild P J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2012 Mar; 18(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 21422148 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
6. Comparison of closed system transfer devices for turnaround time and ease of use. Nurgat ZA; Lawrence M; Elhassan TA; Al Nahedh M; Ashour M; Alaboura D; Al-Jazairi AS; Al-Jedai A J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2019 Jul; 25(5):1142-1151. PubMed ID: 29958506 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
7. Impact and appreciation of two methods aiming at reducing hazardous drug environmental contamination: The centralization of the priming of IV tubing in the pharmacy and use of a closed-system transfer device. Guillemette A; Langlois H; Voisine M; Merger D; Therrien R; Mercier G; Lebel D; Bussières JF J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2014 Dec; 20(6):426-32. PubMed ID: 24395542 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
8. Use of a closed system drug-transfer device eliminates surface contamination with antineoplastic agents. Clark BA; Sessink PJ J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2013 Jun; 19(2):99-104. PubMed ID: 23292973 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
9. [Evaluation of two closed-system drug transfer device in the antineoplastic drug elaboration process]. Gómez-Álvarez S; Porta-Oltra B; Hernandez-Griso M; Pérez-Labaña F; Climente-Martí M Farm Hosp; 2016 Jan; 40(1):36-43. PubMed ID: 26882832 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
10. Syringe plunger contamination by hazardous drugs: a comparative study. Smith ST; Szlaczky MC J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2014 Oct; 20(5):381-5. PubMed ID: 24598373 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
11. [Availability evaluation of closed systems by using practical training kits for preparation of antitumor drugs]. Sato J; Odagiri N; Terui K; Iwasaki Y; Hosoya E; Hayakari M Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 2010 Sep; 37(9):1753-7. PubMed ID: 20841940 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
12. Use of a closed system device to reduce occupational contamination and exposure to antineoplastic drugs in the hospital work environment. Yoshida J; Tei G; Mochizuki C; Masu Y; Koda S; Kumagai S Ann Occup Hyg; 2009 Mar; 53(2):153-60. PubMed ID: 19261696 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
13. Treatment time, ease of use and cost associated with use of Equashield™, PhaSeal Kicenuik K; Northrup N; Dawson A; Locke J; Villamil JA; Chretin J; Sfiligoi G; Clifford C; Rosenberg M; Hamilton T; Regan R; Parsons-Doherty M; Mallett C; Philibert J; Impellizeri J; Hofmeister E Vet Comp Oncol; 2017 Mar; 15(1):163-173. PubMed ID: 25864458 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
14. Effectiveness of a Closed-System Transfer Device in Reducing Surface Contamination in a New Antineoplastic Drug-Compounding Unit: A Prospective, Controlled, Parallel Study. Simon N; Vasseur M; Pinturaud M; Soichot M; Richeval C; Humbert L; Lebecque M; Sidikou O; Barthelemy C; Bonnabry P; Allorge D; Décaudin B; Odou P PLoS One; 2016; 11(7):e0159052. PubMed ID: 27391697 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
15. Performance testing protocol for closed-system transfer devices used during pharmacy compounding and administration of hazardous drugs. Wilkinson AS; Allwood MC; Morris CP; Wallace A; Finnis R; Kaminska E; Stonkute D; Szramowska M; Miller J; Pengelly I; Hemingway M PLoS One; 2018; 13(10):e0205263. PubMed ID: 30379831 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
16. Cost Analysis of Using a Closed-System Transfer Device (CSTD) for Antineoplastic Drug preparation in a Malaysian Government-Funded Hospital. Chan HK; Lim YM Asian Pac J Cancer Prev; 2016 Nov; 17(11):4951-4957. PubMed ID: 28032722 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
17. Investigation on residual-related error and the effect of solution properties using protective devices for the reconstitution of cytotoxic agents in actual situations. Hama K; Kitada N; Fukushima K; Hashida T; Kataoka K J Oncol Pharm Pract; 2011 Mar; 17(1):55-60. PubMed ID: 20605849 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
18. [Verification of reduction in preparation time and cost of cyclophosphamide when using the closed-system drug transfer device]. Ikeno Y; Arii D; Nakajima H; Murooka K; Nojima M; Kidokoro A Gan To Kagaku Ryoho; 2014 May; 41(5):611-5. PubMed ID: 24917007 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
20. Justification of a pharmacy intravenous admixture service in an Australian hospital. Plumridge RJ; Maher M Am J Hosp Pharm; 1993 Mar; 50(3):463-6. PubMed ID: 8442462 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related] [Next] [New Search]