Toxic and narcotic reagents are critical specialized substances widely used in pharmacology, toxicology, neuroscience, and other biomedical fields across medical colleges and research institutions. Due to their high toxicity, significant addictive potential, and elevated risk of abuse, they pose serious safety, regulatory, and ethical challenges. Managing these reagents constitutes a “safety red line” in university laboratories. In recent years, laboratory accidents related to the mismanagement of hazardous chemicals have increased, exposing deficiencies in current practices, such as unclear allocation of responsibilities, insufficient real-time monitoring, and fragmented procurement processes. These incidents underscore the urgent need to strengthen both regulatory frameworks and personnel professionalism to prevent abuse, diversion, and accidental exposure.

This study systematically reviews the major challenges in managing toxic and narcotic reagents in academic settings, including ambiguous approval workflows, a lack of digital tracking, and inadequate safety training. Drawing on the operational experience of the National Medical Products Administration Key Laboratory for Research and Evaluation of Anesthetic and Psychotropic Drugs at Xuzhou Medical University, we propose an integrated management model based on the PDCA (plan-do-check-act) cycle within the overarching framework of a “safety red line.” The model incorporates four iterative phases: planning (defining roles and standard operating procedures), doing (implementing digital procurement and real-time inventory tracking), checking (conducting internal audits and risk assessments), and acting (correcting nonconformities and updating protocols). This paper elaborates on practical experiences and innovative strategies in reagent management and team development, emphasizing institutional mechanisms, technological integration (e.g., role-based access control and blockchain-ready logging), and human factors, such as safety culture and continuous education.

The study demonstrates innovative approaches to building a safety management team tailored to the supervision of toxic and narcotic reagents. Through the PDCA cycle, a supportive environment has been established that enhances the safety and efficiency of teaching and research activities. Key outcomes include a clear hierarchical approval system (departmental review by academic affairs, science and technology, and security offices, followed by centralized qualification by the state assets management office), fully information-based procurement, and mandatory documentation for regulatory submission to public security and drug administration authorities. The model provides strong institutional support, ensures regulatory compliance, and offers a replicable framework for other institutions. It emphasizes continuous training, clear allocation of responsibilities, and the use of digital tools for real-time monitoring and accountability. Since implementation, procedural violations have decreased significantly, and emergency response preparedness has improved.

Effective management of toxic and narcotic reagents requires a multifaceted approach integrating standardized processes, technological empowerment, and a people-oriented safety culture. The proposed PDCA-based model not only safeguards the lives and health of university faculty members and students but also ensures the smooth progression of laboratory activities. By reinforcing laboratory stability, it contributes to the broader social responsibilities of academic institutions. Future efforts should focus on continuous optimization, intelligent monitoring systems, and ongoing professional development to adapt to evolving regulatory demands and emerging research needs.

The construction and operation of public laboratories in pharmaceutical universities are crucial for scientific research, teaching, and innovation. However, persistent challenges hinder their safe and efficient functioning. Common issues include inadequate safety accountability mechanisms, where responsibilities are not clearly defined, creating gaps in oversight. Additionally, insufficient fundamental safeguards, such as outdated equipment, a lack of emergency protocols, and a weak safety culture, exacerbate risks. These deficiencies may result in laboratory accidents, endangering personnel and disrupting academic activities. Therefore, it is imperative to establish a comprehensive safety management framework to mitigate these risks and ensure a secure research environment.

To address these challenges, we propose an integrated approach based on the current development status of domestic medical colleges and universities. Key strategies include the following: establishing a hierarchical safety responsibility system with clearly defined roles and responsibilities for laboratory safety at all levels, including university administrators, department heads, lab managers, and individual researchers; optimizing safety management regulations through standardized operating procedures for hazardous experiments, chemical storage, and waste disposal; regularly updating safety policies in line with national and international laboratory safety standards; implementing closed-loop hazard management through routine safety inspections to identify potential hazards (e.g., faulty equipment and improper chemical handling) and establishing a “discovery–rectification–verification” workflow to ensure timely resolution; strengthening fire emergency response by installing advanced fire detection and suppression systems (e.g., automatic sprinklers and smoke alarms), conducting regular fire drills, and training personnel in emergency response protocols; enhancing safety education and training by mandating safety courses for all laboratory users on chemical hazards, emergency procedures, and personal protective equipment.

The systematic improvement of public laboratory construction and management standards yields multiple substantial benefits. A well-defined safety framework strengthens risk prevention and control, substantially reducing accidents while ensuring uninterrupted laboratory operations. Clear accountability structures, combined with closed-loop hazard management systems, eliminate regulatory gaps and establish a highly robust supervision mechanism. Concurrently, sustained safety education initiatives cultivate a proactive safety mindset among both faculty and students, progressively transforming campus safety culture. The implementation of effective fire safety measures and standardized operational protocols measurably reduces laboratory emergencies. Collectively, these measures create a more secure and sustainable research environment that not only boosts scientific productivity but also elevates the academic standing and reputation of the institution within the scientific community.

The proposed management model provides a practical, scalable, and sustainable solution for enhancing public laboratory safety in pharmaceutical universities. By systematically integrating hierarchical accountability (with clearly defined roles for administrators, faculty, and students), optimized safety regulations (aligned with national and international standards), proactive hazard management (using risk assessments and closed-loop corrective actions), robust emergency preparedness (including fire drills and crisis response training), and comprehensive safety education, institutions can dramatically reduce accidents and create a culture of safety. This approach not only safeguards researchers, students, and staff but also provides a benchmark for peer institutions seeking to modernize their laboratory risk management. Future efforts should prioritize a dynamic, iterative approach to safety management by establishing robust feedback mechanisms to identify systemic weaknesses and implement corrective actions.