Critical care pharmacy workforce: a 2020 re-evaluation of the UK deployment and characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: Critical care pharmacists improve the quality and efficiency of medication therapy whilst reducing treatment costs where they are available. UK critical care pharmacist deployment was described in 2015, highlighting a deficit in numbers, experience level, and critical care access to pharmacy services over the 7-day week. Since then, national workforce standards have been emphasised, quality indicators published, and service commissioning documents produced, reinforced by care quality assessments. Whether these initiatives have resulted in further development of the UK critical care pharmacy workforce is unknown. This evaluation provides a 2020 status update. METHODS: The 2015 electronic data entry tool was updated and circulated for completion by UK critical care pharmacists. The tool captured workforce data disposition as it was just prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, at critical care unit level. MAIN FINDINGS: Data were received for 334 critical care units from 203 organisations (96% of UK critical care units). Overall, 98.2% of UK critical care units had specific clinical pharmacist time dedicated to the unit. The median weekday pharmacist input to each level 3 equivalent bed was 0.066 (0.043-0.088) whole time equivalents, a significant increase from the median position in 2015 (+ 0.021, p < 0.0001). Despite this progress, pharmacist availability remains below national minimum standards (0.1/level 3 equivalent bed). Most units (71.9%) had access to prescribing pharmacists. Geographical variation in pharmacist staffing levels were evident, and weekend services remain extremely limited. CONCLUSIONS: Availability of clinical pharmacists in UK adult critical care units is improving. However, national standards are not routinely met despite widely publicised quality indicators, commissioning specifications, and assessments. Additional measures are needed to address persistent deficits and realise gains in organisational and patient-level outcomes. These measures must include promotion of cross-professional collaborative working, adjusted funding models, and a nationally recognised training pathway for critical care pharmacists.

Development and implementation of a customised rapid syndromic diagnostic test for severe pneumonia.

Background: The diagnosis of pneumonia has been hampered by a reliance on bacterial cultures which take several days to return a result, and are frequently negative. In critically ill patients this leads to the use of empiric, broad-spectrum antimicrobials and compromises good antimicrobial stewardship. The objective of this study was to establish the performance of a syndromic molecular diagnostic approach, using a custom TaqMan array card (TAC) covering 52 respiratory pathogens, and assess its impact on antimicrobial prescribing. Methods: The TAC was validated against a retrospective multi-centre cohort of broncho-alveolar lavage samples. The TAC was assessed prospectively in patients undergoing investigation for suspected pneumonia, with a comparator cohort formed of patients investigated when the TAC laboratory team were unavailable. Co-primary outcomes were sensitivity compared to conventional microbiology and, for the prospective study, time to result. Metagenomic sequencing was performed to validate findings in prospective samples. Antibiotic free days (AFD) were compared between the study cohort and comparator group. Results: 128 stored samples were tested, with sensitivity of 97% (95% confidence interval (CI) 88-100%). Prospectively, 95 patients were tested by TAC, with 71 forming the comparator group. TAC returned results 51 hours (interquartile range 41-69 hours) faster than culture and with sensitivity of 92% (95% CI 83-98%) compared to conventional microbiology. 94% of organisms identified by sequencing were detected by TAC. There was a significant difference in the distribution of AFDs with more AFDs in the TAC group (p=0.02). TAC group were more likely to experience antimicrobial de-escalation (odds ratio 2.9 (95%1.5-5.5)). Conclusions: Implementation of a syndromic molecular diagnostic approach to pneumonia led to faster results, with high sensitivity and impact on antibiotic prescribing.

Hospitalization due to acute exacerbation of chronic pain: An intervention study in a university hospital.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Hospitalization as a result of acute exacerbation of complex chronic pain is a largely hidden problem, as patients are often admitted to hospital under a variety of specialities, and there is frequently no overarching inpatient chronic pain service dedicated to their management. Our institution had established an inpatient acute pain service overseen by pain physicians and staffed by specialist nurses that was intended to focus on the management of perioperative pain. We soon observed an increasing number of nurse-to-nurse referrals of non-surgical inpatients admitted with chronic pain. Some of these patients had seemingly intractable and highly complex pain problems, and consequently we initiated twice-weekly attending physician-led inpatient pain rounds to coordinate their management. From these referrals, we identified a cohort of 20 patients who were frequently hospitalized for long periods with exacerbations of chronic pain. We sought to establish whether the introduction of the physician-led inpatient pain ward round reduced the number and duration of hospitalizations, and costs of treatment. METHODS: We undertook a retrospective, observational, intervention cohort study. We recorded acute Emergency Department (ED) attendances, hospital admissions, and duration and costs of hospitalization of the cohort of 20 patients in the year before and year after introduction of the inpatient pain service. RESULTS: The patients' mean age was 38.2 years (±standard deviation 13.8 years, range 18-68 years); 13 were women (65.0%). The mode number of ED attendances was 4 (range 2-15) pre-intervention, and 3 (range 0-9) afterwards (p=0.116). The mode bed occupancy was 32 days (range 9-170 days) pre-intervention and 19 days (range 0-115 days) afterwards (p=0.215). The total cost of treating the cohort over the 2-year study period was £733,010 (US$1.12m), comprising £429,479 (US$656,291) of bed costs and £303,531 (US$463,828) of investigation costs. The intervention did not achieve significant improvements in the total costs, bed costs or investigation costs. CONCLUSIONS: Despite our attending physician-led intervention, the frequency, duration and very substantial costs of hospitalization of the cohort were not significantly reduced, suggesting that other strategies need to be identified to help these complex and vulnerable patients. IMPLICATIONS: Frequent hospitalization with acute exacerbation of chronic pain is a largely hidden problem that has very substantial implications for patients, their carers and healthcare providers. Chronic pain services tend to focus on outpatient management. Breaking the cycle of frequent and recurrent hospitalization using multidisciplinary chronic pain management techniques has the potential to improve patients' quality of life and reduce hospital costs. Nonetheless, the complexity of these patients' chronic pain problems should not be underestimated and in some cases are very challenging to treat.