Evaluation of an Automated, Pharmacist-Driven, Antimicrobial Patient Acuity Scoring System for Hospitalized Bacteremic Patients.

Purpose: The implementation of an automated, pharmacist-driven, scoring system within the EMR has been shown to improve patient care in patients with Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia by increasing the adherence to disease specific quality-of-care measures. However, there are a lack of studies evaluating the incorporation of blood culture review into standard, non-antimicrobial stewardship pharmacist workflow. Our institution implemented an automated, pharmacist-driven, antimicrobial scoring system in the electronic medical record (EMR) on August 6, 2019. Methods: This was a retrospective, single-center, quasi-experimental study of hospitalized, non-critically ill adult (18-89 years of age) patients with bacteremia between July 6, 2018 and July 5, 2019 (pre-implementation group) and September 6, 2019 and September 5, 2020 (post-implementation group). The primary outcome was time to directed antibiotic therapy in patients with positive blood cultures. Secondary outcomes included hospital length-of-stay, days of therapy (DOT) while inpatient, time to effective therapy, 30-day all-cause mortality, and rates of Clostridioides difficile infections documented within 3 months of positive culture results. Results: Implementation of the antimicrobial scoring system did not result in a significant change in time to directed antibiotic therapy (32.5 hours vs 37.4 hours; P = .757). There was also no difference found for time to effective antibiotic therapy (-12.6 hours vs -14.2 hours; P =.905) and no difference found for all other secondary outcomes. Conclusion: The implementation of the antimicrobial scoring system did not lead to an improvement in clinical outcomes. Further research is needed to better define a patient population that may benefit from this system.

Impact of the Injectable Opioid Drug Shortage on Analgesia and Sedation Management in the Medical Intensive Care Unit: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to assess the impact of the injectable opioid drug shortage on analgesia and sedation management in the medical intensive care unit (MICU). Methods: A single-center, retrospective cohort study was conducted of mechanically ventilated patients during the injectable opioid shortage. Outcomes were compared between a cohort of patients during the intravenous (IV) opioid shortage (01/01/18-03/31/18) and a control cohort (01/01/17-03/31/17). Total IV opioids and alternative sedative administration were assessed. Richmond Agitation Sedation Score (RASS) and Clinical Pain Observation Score (CPOT) assessments were also evaluated. The primary outcome was percentage of RASS within goal. Secondary outcomes included duration of mechanical ventilation, hospital/ICU length of stay, and mortality. Results: One hundred patients were included (50 patients per cohort). In the shortage cohort, 23.2% fewer IV opioids were used (40 501.8 vs 52 713.8 oral morphine equivalents [OME]). No statistical differences were found in percentage of patients within goal RASS between the shortage and control (median 63.7% vs 74.8%; P = .094) or CPOT (median 49.7% vs 47.7%; P = .575). More patients received enteral opioids and propofol on day 1 in the shortage cohort when compared to the control (22% vs 4%; P = .007 and 76% vs 56%; P = .035) but there were no differences in benzodiazepine, dexmedetomidine, or antipsychotic use. No differences in mechanical ventilation, hospital/ICU length of stay, or mortality were found. Conclusions: Use of less IV opioids during the injectable opioid shortage did not affect achievement of goal RASS and CPOT scores or increase prescribing of sedative medications such as benzodiazepines in the MICU.

Evaluation of Dexmedetomidine Dosing in Obese Critically Ill Patients.

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective α2-adrenoreceptor agonist that produces dose-dependent sedation, anxiolysis, and analgesia without respiratory depression. Due to these ideal sedative properties, there has been increased interest in utilizing dexmedetomidine as a first-line sedative for critically ill patients requiring light sedation. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ability to achieve goal intensive care unit (ICU) sedation before and after an institutional change of dosing from actual (ABW) to adjusted (AdjBW) body weight in obese patients on dexmedetomidine. METHODS: This study included patients ≥ 18 years old, admitted to a surgical or medical ICU, required dexmedetomidine for at least 8 hours as a single continuous infusion sedative, and weighed ≥ 120% of ideal body weight. Percentage of RASS measurements within goal range (-1 to +1) during the first 48 hours after initiation of dexmedetomidine as the sole sedative agent or until discontinuation dosed on ABW compared to AdjBW was evaluated. RESULTS: 100 patients were included in the ABW cohort and 100 in the AdjBW cohort. The median dosing weight was significantly higher in the ABW group (95.9 [78.9-119.5] vs 82.2 [72.1-89.8] kg; p = 0.001). There was no statistical difference in percent of RASS measurements in goal range (61.5% vs 69.6%, p = 0.267) in patients that received dexmedetomidine dosed based on ABW versus AdjBW. CONCLUSION: Dosing dexmedetomidine using AdjBW in obese critically ill patients for ongoing ICU sedation resulted in no statistical difference in the percent of RASS measurements within goal when compared to ABW dosing. Further studies are warranted.

Comparison of Fixed Dosing vs Train of Four Titration of Cisatracurium in COVID-19 ARDS Patients.

Background: Early neuromuscular blockade with cisatracurium has been associated with improved outcomes in moderate-severe acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Previous studies have demonstrated increased drug utilization without benefits in oxygenation using fixed dose cisatracurium compared to train-of-four (TOF) titration. Objective: We sought to compare a novel, lower fixed dose cisatracurium protocol to TOF titration evaluating the impact on PaO2:FiO2 ratio (P/F). Methods: We conducted a single-center retrospective cohort study comparing fixed dose cisatracurium to TOF titration. We included patients aged 18-89 treated for COVID-19 ARDS with a baseline P/F≤200 who received a cisatracurium infusion for ≥12 h. The primary outcome was change in P/F at 48 h from baseline. Secondary outcomes included change in P/F at 24 h and 7 days, need for mechanical ventilation at day 28, and cisatracurium utilization. Results: Analyses included 125 patients (fixed dose = 65, TOF = 60). Severe ARDS was common with a baseline median P/F of 73.7 vs 79.5, P = .133. The change in P/F at 48 h was larger in the TOF cohort in the adjusted analysis (24.9 vs 70.8, P < .005). The rate and total cumulative dose of cisatracurium were higher in the fixed dose cohort (5 vs 3 mcg/kg/min, P < .001; 1034 vs 612 mg, P < .001) despite similar infusion durations (44.1 h vs 48.5 h, P = .642). Conclusions: Patients in the TOF cisatracurium cohort had improved P/F at 48 h compared to the fixed dose cohort, while also using only 60% of the cumulative dose. Future directions should include analysis of the implications of increased cisatracurium exposure on patient outcomes.

Implementation of a Protocol for Peripheral Intravenous Norepinephrine: Does It Save Central Line Insertion, Is It Safe?

BACKGROUND: Central venous catheters (CVC) are generally recommended for norepinephrine administration due to risk of tissue ischemia. Early resuscitation, leading to decreased infusion duration, may minimize the need for CVCs if norepinephrine can be administered safely through a peripheral intravenous catheter (PIV). OBJECTIVE: A protocol was developed for peripheral administration. Safety, CVC placement, and adherence with protocol elements were evaluated. METHODS: A single-center, prospective, observational pilot was conducted for patients receiving norepinephrine in the Medical Intensive Care Unit (MICU). Patients were considered for PIV administration of low dose norepinephrine for less than 24 hours based on clinical status and anticipated short-term use. Protocolized interventions for PIV's included criteria for gauge, number, and site as well as visual inspection and evaluation every 2 hours. Data was collected on protocol elements to evaluate safety and effectiveness of the protocol. RESULTS: There were 316 occurrences of norepinephrine infusions including 92 via PIV (patients may have received multiple treatments). 34% (31/92) did not require a CVC. 3 had infiltrated PIV's without tissue injury. Maximum dose adherence was 73%. 97% of infusions ran less than 24 hours. Nursing adherence included: 91% gauge, 65% proper site, 99% adequate number, 49% blood return on initiation, 55% ongoing blood return, and 61% IV site checked. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that norepinephrine is safe to administer through a PIV at low doses for less than 24 hours using a protocol. Prevention of unnecessary CVC insertion is beneficial by minimizing the risk of central line complications thus improving patient morbidity.

Reducing Unnecessary Laboratory Utilization in the Medical ICU: A Fellow-Driven Quality Improvement Initiative.

OBJECTIVES: Overutilization of laboratory services is now recognized as harmful to patients and wasteful. In fact, the American Board of Internal Medicine's Choosing Wisely campaign recommends against ordering routine testing that does not answer a clinical question. Per peer benchmarking, our institution as a whole occupied an extreme outlier position at the 100th percentile for laboratory utilization. We sought to address this problem starting in our medical ICUs with a quality improvement project. DESIGN: Quality improvement project using the design, measure, analyze, improve, and control process. The primary endpoint was a sustained reduction in laboratory utilization. Counterbalance metrics were also followed, and these included mortality, renal replacement therapy initiation rates, stat laboratory orders, and central catheter-associated blood stream infections. SETTING: The medical ICU at the Ohio State University Medical Center. PATIENTS: All patients admitted to the medical ICU from March 2019 to March 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Root causes were identified and addressed with the implementation of a wide range of interventions involving a multidisciplinary team led by trainee physicians. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There was a sustained 20% reduction in the number of tests performed per patient day, with no change in the counterbalance metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Trainees can affect positive change in the culture and processes at their institutions to safely reduce laboratory utilization.

Increased incidence of clinical hypotension with etomidate compared to ketamine for intubation in septic patients: A propensity matched analysis.

PURPOSE: This study compared the incidence of clinical hypotension between ketamine and etomidate within a 24 hour period following endotracheal intubation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This single-center, retrospective propensity-matched cohort study included septic patients admitted to our medical intensive care unit who received either etomidate or ketamine for intubation. Clinical hypotension was defined as any one of the following: mean arterial pressure (MAP) decrease >40% compared to baseline and MAP <70 mmHg, MAP <60 mmHg, initiation of a vasopressor, or increase to >30% of the initial vasopressor dose. RESULTS: Patients were matched based on propensity scores determined by demographics and baseline characteristics. A total of 384 (200 etomidate and 184 ketamine) patients were included for analysis with 230 patients (115 in each group) matched. Clinical hypotension was less prevalent in patients who received ketamine as compared to etomidate [51.3% vs. 73% (odds ratio=0.39, 95% confidence interval=0.22-0.67, P=.001]. The etomidate group experienced significantly lower MAPs at time periods 6.1-12 hours (65.1 mmHg vs. 69.3 mmHg, P=.01) and 12.1-24 hours (63.9 mmHg vs. 68.4 mmHg, P=.003). CONCLUSIONS: Ketamine was associated with a lower incidence of clinical hypotension within the 24 hour period following endotracheal intubation in septic patients.