I need a comparison between the different non-pvc bags machines used
for filling pharmaceutical solutions i.e. pros and cons of each. 
There are several players in the industry including but not restricted
to Plumat and Thimonnier.

---

Request for Question Clarification by nancylynn-ga on 25 Apr 2004 14:30 PDT

Hello ezz5000-ga:

After quite a few hours of searching, I'm afraid the best I can do is
offer you sites that provide comparisons of various brands of
machines, noting the special features of various models. (These brands
include Enflex, Plumat, Thimonnier, and several more.)

That would at least help you learn which brands/models have which
features, and help you to decide which model best suits your
pharmacy's specific needs.

One of those sites lists "unique attributes" and the best
"advantage(s)" for some bags machines and bag testers. For instance,
the "THIMONNIER IVF 1800" most notable "advantages" include: "Designed
to run w/ ea. of the existing referenced polyolefins-based materials;
Bag formats produced from "one roll width" only: no need to change
roll when changing bag format; Bags fitted w/ tubes of different
length (30 - 60mm)or diameter . . . .Constant edge control/film
centering using ultra-sonic sensing techn. (single/double wound);
Multi-step sealing techn. w/ automatic re-centering of tubes under
sealing jaws; Stainless steel construction; Driven by real time
industrial PLC w/ enhanced HMI."

But I simply couldn't find any studies that compare the *pros & cons*
of various brands of non-PVC bags machines. I can only find sites that
list attributes of various models; *not* potential drawbacks. However,
from reading the information, you likely can decide which models are
the best candidates for your needs and which ones you can rule out.

Every attempt to search for pros and cons of specific brands led me
only to very general research that (favorably) compares non-PVC bags
to PVC bags, in various medical applications.

I did find several discussion sites for pharmacists, which include
discussions related to pharmacy equipment. It might help you to post
at those sites, asking for first-hand experience sort of feedback. But
I can't find any sort of clinical trial evaluations of brands, not
even at trade-related sites, such as
http://www.farma.com/secciones/noticiasuk.asp, or in pharmacology
journals.

If what I've found is sufficient for your needs, let me know and I'll
post what I've found as an answer.

Otherwise, I'll just leave this question open in hopes that another
researcher can find precisely what you want.

Regards,
nancylynn-ga

---

Clarification of Question by ezz5000-ga on 27 Apr 2004 09:16 PDT

Nancy,

Hi!

I have just seen your request.  What we are really looking for is a
comparison.  something that shows what is good or bad about each
machine, based on someone's experience.  We have the company brochures
that give us the specs. of each machine, so this is not really what we
are looking for.

Thanks,

Mohamed Ezz, MD

---

Request for Question Clarification by nancylynn-ga on 27 Apr 2004 11:42 PDT

I totally understand.

In addition to finding data about particular models' unique attributes
and most outstanding features (but not drawbacks!), I did find
discussion sites where you can post questions requesting feedback from
other medical professionals regarding various bag machines models.

So, those discussion boards will allow you to get anecdotal
information from firsthand experience by others who've used various
machines.

If that would be helpful, let me know. 

In the meantime, I'll take another look around. But after quite a bit
of searching, I really couldn't find any studies that compare machines
brand-by-brand, or model-by-model.

Regards,
nancylynn-ga

---

Clarification of Question by ezz5000-ga on 27 Apr 2004 20:49 PDT

Nancy,

I know that this is a tough search.  Pls. post whtever you have found.
 I will accept this as the answer.

Thanks,

Mohamed Ezz

---

Request for Question Clarification by nancylynn-ga on 28 Apr 2004 15:03 PDT

Hello ezz5000-ga:

Thank you for your very kind offer for me to go ahead and post what I
have, but I'm reluctant to do that. Since I could only find
comparisons of attributes and advantages of certain models -- but not
a comparison of pros and cons, let alone model-by-model -- I really
don't feel that you should have to pay this high a fee.

If you want me to post what I have (including discussion forums, and
overviews of various models' features and attributes), then I think
you should consider lowering the fee.

You can easily change the fee for this question by simply going to
your link "My Account" and selecting "My Unanswered Questions."  Then,
just click on this question and then click on "Change Question
Parameters" to modify the price.

If you're still hoping to get a detailed pros and cons comparison
study (which I was unable to find), we'll just let this question sit
unanswered. Your question doesn't expire until May 23, and there's
always a chance one of my colleagues can locate just the type of study
you're hoping to find.

Regards,
nancylynn-ga

---

Clarification of Question by ezz5000-ga on 28 Apr 2004 19:58 PDT

Nancy,

Ok!  I think that's fair.  Pls. charge my account for $ 50.

Regards,

Mohamed Ezz

---

Request for Question Clarification by nancylynn-ga on 29 Apr 2004 16:08 PDT

Hi Mohamed:

I can't change the price for you! You have to do that yourself and
it's very easy to do.

Just go to your "My Account" page and select "My Unanswered Questions."  Then,
just click on the question "non-PVC bags machines," and then click on
"Change Question Parameters" to modify the price.

That's all there is to it!

Nancy

Hello  ezz5000-ga:

Thank you for kindly re-posting your question.

Here's what I found for you:

Comparisons/Evaluations Of Non-PVC Bag Machines in
Pharmaceutical/Other Medical Applications:

I searched and searched, but couldn't find any such evaluations
limited only to pharmaceutical applications. I could only find pro &
con comparisons regarding non-PVC vs. PVC, and within more generalized
medical applications.

Also, I could only find comparisons by attributes -- not drawbacks.

Overviews/Comparisons Of Various Non-PVC Bags Machines For Pharmacy:

***
PTI, Packing Technologies and Inspection, LLC, has a list of bags
machines, and bag testers, and their most notable assets:
http://www.packnet.com/ve/37638/products.html

Best of all, when you click on the brand/model name at the extreme
left, it will bring up a close-up page on that product that lists that
model's best advantage(s).

For instance, click on the product name "Seal Scan" at left, and it
brings up this page:
http://www.packnet.com/ve/37638/pdt/6354.html
"Unique Attributes: The ABUS 550 uses special ultrasonic transmitters
and receivers, this gives an indication of heat seal integrity,
precisely identifying the size and location of a defect."

Clicking on the THIMONNIER I.V. Bag Making & Filling Equipment" next
to "THIMONNIER 1800", at extreme left, brings up:
http://www.packnet.com/ve/37638/pdt/8852.html

"ADVANTAGES: Designed to run w/ ea. of the existing referenced
polyolefins-based materials; Bag formats produced from "one roll
width" only: no need to change roll when changing bag format; Bags
fitted w/ tubes of different length (30 - 60mm)or diameter."

"ADVANTAGES (additional): Constant edge control/film centering using
ultra-sonic sensing techn. (single/double wound); Multi-step sealing
techn. w/ automatic re-centering of tubes under sealing jaws;
Stainless steel construction; Driven by real time industrial PLC w/
enhanced HMI."

***
Here's a comparison, " PRODUCT UPDATE: FORM-FILL-SEAL EQUIPMENT Offers
Versatility," from the Sept. 2000 issue of Pharmaceutical and Medical
Packaging News Magazine:
http://www.devicelink.com/pmpn/archive/00/09/010.html

The above article presents a solid roundup of detailed overview of
various non-PVC machines. Brands include:

Plümat.
Enflex, made by Key International Inc.
The Sureflow Model 8000 made by Mahaffy & Harder Engineering Co.
The MS235, made by Marchesini Packaging.
The V12BT6S made by Circle Packaging Machinery Inc.
The automatic open-fill-seal system, made by About Packaging Robotics Inc.
The Model 40, from AmeriPak.
PLC-controlled vertical form-fill-seal machines, from Packaging Aids Corp.
The R230 and R530 models, made by Multivac.
The Bagmaster series and the C-series baggers, made by Batching Systems Inc.

All of the above manufacturers are hyperlinked, so you can easily make
your way to each company's Web site for more details and to see more
models.

***
European Medical Device Manufacturer Magazine featured this roundup of
bag machines (including Thimonnier):
http://www.devicelink.com/emdm/archive/02/01/002.html
(Just as with the Pharmaceutical and Medical Packaging News Magazine's
piece, you're not going to see "cons," per se, but you will get a solid
comparison of features among various models and brands.)

Pharmaceutical Solutions & Materials Discussion Groups:

At Medical Packaging News Magazine's site you can also easily link to,
then register (for free), at Medical Device Link's discussion forum:
http://www.devicelink.com/forum/

I couldn't find a discussion of non-pvc bags machines there, but you
can certainly start such a discussion and ask fellow forum members to
post their experiences with, and opinions on, various brands of
machines.

Pharmaceutical Online also has a discussion forum:
http://www.pharmaceuticalonline.com/content/partner/home.asp?page=http://www.ispe.org/Content/NavigationMenu/Communities_and_Forums/Discussion_Forums1/Enter_Forums.htm
where you can also post and seek feedback and comparisons. I would
suggest you try posting in the "All Clinical Materials" forum.

Be aware that at both groups you'll run into a lot of annoying ads
from manufacturers' sales reps. You'll have to weed your way through
those, but it may be worthwhile to contact some of those reps to ask
if they have any comparison studies they can send you. (IF they do,
they're sure to be studies that put their products in a good light
(!), but you may still be able to glean some solid comparative data.)

***
HighBeam Research (formerly eLibrary):
http://www.highbeam.com/library/index.asp
Offers a free trial which allows you to see abstracts. You must choose
full membership ($19.95 a month) to read the article online. However,
the free abstract will allow you to see the publication and volume
number from the article's publication, so you might be able to find
that magazine at a library, for free.

I searched HighBeam using the term "non-pvc AND bags," but still
failed to come up with a model-by-model comparison.

Using the search term "non-pvc" will yield some potentially helpful
information though, such as this 2000 press release:
http://www.highbeam.com/library/doc0.asp?DOCID=1G1:62543751&num=20&ctrlInfo=Round1a%3AMode1%3ASR%3AResult
"Pactiv Corporation . . .  a specialty packaging company, today
announced that it has received a Medical Design Excellence Award
(MDEA) for its Propyflex(R) PVC-free bags."

***
General Background On Non-PVC Bags:

The FDA's 1999 "Workshop on Plasticizers: Scientific Issues in Blood
Collection, Storage and Transfusion (Plasticizers in Blood Bags):
http://www.fda.gov/cber/minutes/plast101899.htm
includes a discussion of Baxter's products. However, this presentation
pertains to blood collection.

For General Reference & Background On The Shift To Non-PVC, See:

DEHP in Medical Devices: An Exposure and Toxicity Assessment:
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpb-dgps/therapeut/zfiles/english/advcomm/eap/dehp/minutes/dehp_revised_risk_assessment_e.pdf
A study prepared by Canada's Medical Devices Bureau, published July
2001, revised Feb. 2002.

***
EAP on DEHP in Medical Devices - Record of Proceedings
http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hpfb-dgpsa/tpd-dpt/2001-04-26_record_e.html
"Pearson and Trissel (1993) have recommended that these drug
formulations should be prepared in non-PVC containers and administered
through non-PVC tubing.

***
The Economics of Phasing Out PVC:
http://216.239.41.104/search?q=cache:y3jS4oMzrmsJ:www.healthybuilding.net/pvc/Economics_Of_Phasing_Out_PVC.pdf+compare+non-pvc+brands+bags+&hl=en

May 1999 article from "Your Business in Brief" at "Plastics Technology
Online":
http://216.109.117.135/search/cache?p=%22non-pvc+bag%22+AND+machines+AND+pharmaceutical+&ei=UTF-8&n=20&fl=0&u=www.plasticstechnology.com/articles/199905
bib1.html&w=%22non+pvc+bag%22+machines+pharmaceutical&d=A9CC1B7848&c=609&yc=
60462&icp=1

Search Strings:
"non-pvc" AND bags AND machine AND pharmaceutical
choosing AND non-pvc AND pharmaceutical
compare brands non-pvc bags +pharmaceutical
compare non-pvc brands bags
benefits non-pvc bags +brands
non-pvc bags pharmaceutical
pvc-free bags machines pharmaceutical
non-PVC bags machines
evaluate AND "non-pvc" AND bags AND machines
compare [brand] AND [brand]
Enflex Thimonnier Sureflow Bagmaster +compare
Enflex OR Thimonnier OR Sureflow OR Plumat AND non-PVC
pros cons pvc-free bags machines
pros cons non-pvc bags machines
choosing non-pvc bags machines
opinions non-PVC bags machines
best AND brands AND non-pvc AND bags AND pharmacy
buying non-pvc bag pharmaceutical
research AND "non-pvc" AND bags AND manufacturer
no-pvc +bags +pharmaceutical

I hope my research is of help to you.

Please post a "Request For Clarification," if you need help navigating
any of the above links, or if you require clarification on any of the
above points, prior to rating my answer.

Regards,

nancylynn-ga
Google Answers Researcher