Publication rate and impact stratified by gender among pharmacists designated Fellow in the American College of Critical Care Medicine.

BACKGROUND: There are approximately 352,000 pharmacists practicing in the United States, with most (59%) being female. Editorial board membership and publications with a female as the first author in selected pharmacy journals has increased in the past 2 decades. This study determined whether these positive trends are also occurring in critical care pharmacy. OBJECTIVE: To report publication rate and publication impact stratified by male and female gender among pharmacists designated Fellow of Critical Care Medicine (FCCM). METHODS: Pharmacists designated FCCM from inception through the 2020 convocation year were identified in January 2021 using a list provided by the Society of Critical Care Medicine. Pharmacists were excluded if they were designated Master of Critical Care Medicine, did not have an active pharmacist license, or did not have data in the Scopus database. Data were collected in February 2021 including year of first publication, total number of publications, citations, and Hirsch index (h-index). RESULTS: A total of 134 pharmacists were evaluable, including 76 males (57%) and 58 females (43%). Males had an earlier first publication year than females (2005 vs. 2010; P < 0.001). Males have produced a higher number of publications per individual pharmacist (29 vs. 13; P = 0.002) and a similar number of publications per year (2 vs. 1; P = 0.05). When comparing publication impact, males generated more citations (384 vs. 139; P = 0.001) and had a higher h-index (10 vs. 6, P < 0.001). These trends persisted when data from only the past 5 years were used. CONCLUSION: There is statistically significant gender disparity in publication rate and impact. However, this disparity seems to be decreasing with time as the rate of females designated FCCM is increasing. This is consistent with an overall increase in the proportion of pharmacists who are female and deserves further exploration.

Management of Venous Thromboembolism in Morbid Obesity With Rivaroxaban or Warfarin.

BACKGROUND: Rivaroxaban is a first-line option for the management of venous thromboembolism (VTE). However, limited data are available regarding its effectiveness in morbidly obese patients. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate rates of thrombosis and bleeding in morbidly obese patients receiving rivaroxaban or warfarin for VTE. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective cohort study was conducted to compare rates of bleeding and thrombosis in patients receiving rivaroxaban versus warfarin for acute VTE. Patients were included if they were older than 18 years and had a body mass index (BMI) greater than 40 kg/m2 or weight greater than 120 kg. The primary effectiveness outcome was hazard of VTE recurrence; the primary safety outcome was hazard of major bleeding. Patients were followed for up to 12 months. RESULTS: A total of 1281 patients were identified for acute VTE and were included in this study with 487 patients receiving rivaroxaban and 785 receiving warfarin. The average cohort age was 57.6 ± 14.6 years, and the average weight was 136.4 ± 27.2 kg. After controlling for confounding factors, the use of rivaroxaban was not associated with an increased hazard of VTE events when compared with warfarin (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.69, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.42-1.08, P = 0.12) or major bleeding (HR = 1.29, 95% CI: 0.66-2.30, P = 0.52). CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: No difference was observed in obese patients with weight >120 kg or BMI >40 kg/m2 receiving rivaroxaban or warfarin for VTE treatment in hazard of VTE or major bleeding. Either agent may be considered an appropriate treatment option in this population.