Comparative analysis of preparation errors and contamination in robotic and manual chemotherapy compounding: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Keywords:
robotic compounding, chemotherapy, systematic review, meta-analysisAbstract
The number of cancer patients in Thailand has been steadily increasing, leading to a significant rise in the demand for chemotherapy compounding by manual pharmacists. Currently, robotic systems are widely employed in several countries and have begun to be introduced in Thailand. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the preparation errors and contamination rates associated with intravenous chemotherapy compounding, comparing robotic systems with manual preparation by clinical oncology pharmacists. A total of 2,197 studies were initially identified from various databases, including PubMed, ScienceDirect, Cochrane reviews, and others, covering publications from database inception through April 16, 2025. Of these, 11 studies were selected for inclusion. The quality of the included studies was assessed using the ROBINS-I tool, revealing that 7 studies had a moderate risk of bias, while 4 studies had a serious risk of bias. The meta-analysis demonstrated that robotic chemotherapy compounding was not significantly associated with lower rates of absolute dose errors (MD=-0.04, 95%CI -0.40, 0.33, I2=99.7% model with random effect model), external contamination (OR=0.49, 95%Cl 0.10, 2.40, I2=71.4% model with random effect model) and with a reduction in failure rates or rejected dose (OR=0.45, 95%Cl 0.09, 2.17, I2=84.1% model with random effect model). Additionally, environmental contamination (OR=1.61, 95%Cl 0.72, 3.63, I2=54.3% model with random effect model) was more frequently observed in the robotic compounding group, although this difference was not statistically significant. In conclusion, robotic chemotherapy compounding represents an effective alternative to manual preparation by pharmacists. However, its high cost should be considered, and implementation must align with each hospital's specific needs and financial capabilities.
References
Strategy and planning division of Office of the Permanent Secretary, Ministry of Public Health. Public health statistic A.D. 2023. Nonthaburi: Ministry of Public Health; 2023.
ISMP list of high-alert medications in acute care settings [Internet]. Institute for Safety Medication Practice. 2018 [cited 2025 April 30]. Available from: https://www.ismp.org/sites/default/files/attachments/2018-08/highAlert2018-Acute-Final.pdf.
The Association of hospital pharmacist (Thailand) [Internet]. [cited 2025 April 30]. Available from: https://www.thaihp.org/drug-system-survey/
National Cancer Institute of Thailand. Standard practice manual for chemotherapy preparation and post-chemotherapy patient care,. Bangkok: National Cancer Institute of Thailand; 2017.
Lukanawonakul A, Siripakornkan T, Tungkasamit T. Effectiveness of the chemotherapy drug preparation robot accuracy and precision and working time for injectable anticancer drugs in Udon Thani cancer hospital patients. J DMS 2023;48(4):47-54. (in Thai)
Yang C, Ni X, Zhang L, et al. Intravenous compounding robots in pharmacy intravenous admixture services: A systematic review. Medicine (Baltimore) 2023;102(19):e33476. doi:10.1097/MD.0000000000033476.
Shin S, Koo J, Kim SW, et al. Evaluation of robotic systems on cytotoxic drug preparation: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicina (Kaunas) 2023;59(3):431. doi:10.3390/medicina59030431.
Page MJ, McKenzie JE, Bossuyt PM, et al. The PRISMA 2020 statement: an updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. J Clin Epidemiol 2021;134:178-89. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2021.03.001.
Sterne JA, Hernán MA, Reeves BC, et al. ROBINS-I: a tool for assessing risk of bias in non-randomised studies of interventions. BMJ 2016;355:i4919. doi:10.1136/bmj.i4919.
Shi LL. Implementation and evaluation of robotics intravenous compounding technology in a tertiary hospital oncology pharmacy. Houston: University of Houston; 2024.
Cho HN, Wells L, Halford Z. Implementation and evaluation of APOTECAchemo in a community cancer center: A comparative study of robotic versus manual antineoplastic preparation. J Pharm Technol 2024;40(6):269-76. doi:10.1177/87551225241278203.
Geersing TH, Klous MG, Franssen EJF, et al. Robotic compounding versus manual compounding of chemotherapy: Comparing dosing accuracy and precision. Eur J Pharm Sci 2020;155:105536. doi:10.1016/j.ejps.2020.105536.
Krämer I, Federici M, Schierl R. Environmental and product contamination during the preparation of antineoplastic drugs with robotic systems. Pharm Technol Hosp Pharm 2018;3 doi:10.1515/pthp-2018-0018.
Iwamoto T, Morikawa T, Hioki M, et al. Performance evaluation of the compounding robot, APOTECAchemo, for injectable anticancer drugs in a Japanese hospital. J Pharm Health Care Sci 2017;3:12. doi:10.1186/s40780-017-0081-z.
Masini C, Nanni O, Antaridi S, et al. Automated preparation of chemotherapy: quality improvement and economic sustainability. Am J Health Syst Pharm 2014;71(7):579-85. doi:10.2146/ajhp130489.
Hao M, Wang T, Zhu J, et al. Evaluation of external contamination on the vial surfaces of some hazardous drugs that commonly used in Chinese hospitals and comparison between environmental contamination generated during robotic compounding by IV: dispensing robot vs. manual compounding in biological safety cabinet. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2022;28(7):1487-98. doi:10.1177/10781552211023571.
Schierl R, Masini C, Groeneveld S, et al. Environmental contamination by cyclophosphamide preparation: Comparison of conventional manual production in biological safety cabinet and robot-assisted production by APOTECAchemo. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2016;22(1):37-45. doi:10.1177/1078155214551316.
Seger AC, Churchill WW, Keohane CA, et al. Impact of robotic antineoplastic preparation on safety, workflow, and costs. J Oncol Pract 2012;8(6):344-9, 1 p following 349. doi:10.1200/JOP.2012.000600.
Sessink PJ, Leclercq GM, Wouters DM, et al. Environmental contamination, product contamination and workers exposure using a robotic system for antineoplastic drug preparation. J Oncol Pharm Pract 2015;21(2):118-27. doi:10.1177/1078155214522840.
Buning WA, Geersing TH, Crul M. The assessment of environmental and external cross-contamination in preparing ready-to-administer cytotoxic drugs: a comparison between a robotic system and conventional manual production. Int J Pharm Pract 2020;28(1):66-74. doi:10.1111/ijpp.12575.
Batson S, Mitchell SA, Lau D, et al. Automated compounding technology and workflow solutions for the preparation of chemotherapy: A systematic review. Eur J Hosp Pharm 2020;27(6):330-6. doi:10.1136/ejhpharm-2019-001948.
Youngkong S, Pumtong S, Suksiriworapong J, et al. Situation analysis of intravenous admixture in Thai hospitals and their readiness for introducing automated intravenous admixture solutions. Bangkok: Faculty of Pharmacy, Mahidol University and Institute of Field Robotics, King Mongkut’s University of Technology Thonburi 2024.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Journal of Medicine and Health Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
