Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 23, 2025
Generation, Amplification, and Titration of Recombinant Respiratory Syncytial Viruses
Published on: April 4, 2019
Vaccine preparation time, errors, satisfaction, and preference of prefilled syringes versus RSV vaccines requiring
Darshan Mehta1, Samantha Kimball-Carroll2, Dayna R Clark2
1Moderna, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA.
Aim:
The current study compared preparation time, errors, satisfaction, and preference for a prefilled syringe (PFS) versus two RSV vaccines requiring reconstitution (VRR1 and VRR2) in a randomized, single-blinded time and motion study.
Methods:
Pharmacists, nurses, and pharmacy technicians were randomized to a preparation sequence of the three vaccines. Participants read instructions, then consecutively prepared the three vaccines with a 3-5-min washout period in between. Preparations were video recorded and reviewed by a trained pharmacist for preparation time and errors using predefined, vaccine-specific checklists. Participant demographics, satisfaction with vaccine preparation, and vaccine preference were recorded. Within-subjects analysis of variance was used to compare preparation time. Mixed-effects Poisson and ordered logistic regression models were used to compare the number of preparation errors and satisfaction scores, respectively.
Results:
Sixty-three pharmacists (60%), nurses (35%), and pharmacy technicians (5%) participated at four sites in the United States. The least squares mean preparation time per dose for PFS was 141.8 s (95% CI = 156.8-126.7; p <.0001) faster than for VRR1, 103.6 s (95% CI = 118.7-88.5; p <.0001) faster than for VRR2, and 122.7 s (95% CI = 134.2-111.2; p <.0001) faster than the pooled VRRs. Overall satisfaction (combined "Very" and "Extremely") was 87.3% for PFS, 28.6% for VRR1, and 47.6% for VRR2. Most participants (81.0%) preferred the PFS vaccine.
Limitations:
The study is limited by the inability to completely blind observers. To minimize the effects of order, we utilized a 3-sequence block design; however, the order in which the vaccines were prepared may have affected outcomes. Participants were assessed once, whereas if repeated preparations were performed there may have been trained efficiencies gained for each vaccine.
Conclusion:
PFS vaccines can greatly simplify the vaccine preparation process, allowing administrators to prepare almost four times more doses per hour than with vial and syringe systems.
