Implementation of pharmacy-led preoperative medication reconciliation in surgical oncology patients.

BACKGROUND: Pharmacy-led medication history collection and reconciliation have demonstrated decreased medication errors, increased patient safety, and improved cost-savings. However, literature lacks documented efforts to implement such services in the preoperative space, where having accurate medication lists following complex procedures with high postoperative admission rates is critical. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to describe the implementation of a telephonic pharmacy student and pharmacist-led preoperative medication reconciliation program. PRACTICE DESCRIPTION: The service was piloted using third- and fourth-year pharmacy students to conduct telephonic medication histories for urologic surgical oncology patients. Weekly reports identified eligible patients with scheduled procedures within 2 weeks' time. Using standardized methods for patient communication and documentation, students authored telephone encounter notes that were reviewed and signed by pharmacist preceptors. Pharmacist preceptors also reconciled home medication lists based on students' findings. PRACTICE INNOVATION: A standardized preoperative medication reconciliation process was developed and implemented utilizing third- and fourth-year pharmacy students. Resulting notes were available for surgical staff on the day of patients' procedures and upon potential postoperative admission. EVALUATION METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate successfully documented medication histories collected by pharmacy students within the pharmacy-led preoperative medication reconciliation program. RESULTS: Forty-six medication reconciliation notes were identified between August 2021 and February 2022, and 39 met inclusion criteria. Amongst the 177 medication additions, deletions, and edits, deletions were the most common, and 95% of patients had at least 1 medication discrepancy identified. A total of 33 medication classes were represented by the identified discrepancies, and each encounter took an average of 33 minutes to complete. CONCLUSION: Preoperative medication reconciliation services can be successfully accomplished through a telephonic pharmacy student and pharmacist-led workflow. Accurate medication histories aid in minimizing medication errors and increasing patient safety.

Comparing Opioid Usage in Non-Intensive Care Unit Trauma Patients After Implementing Multimodal Analgesia Order Sets.

INTRODUCTION: Opioid addiction frequently occurs after exposure to prescribed pain medications. Trauma patients are likely to receive opioids due to injuries and surgeries resulting in high levels of pain. Multimodal analgesia has been shown to decrease opioid consumption postoperatively. A multimodal analgesia order set was implemented with the goal of increasing prescription of multimodal analgesia contributing to decreased overall opioid use. We hypothesized that the multimodal order set would be associated with significantly less opioid utilization without affecting pain scores. METHODS: This single-center retrospective cohort analysis included non-intensive care unit trauma patients. Patients were propensity-matched by the year of treatment. Oral morphine equivalents and pain scores were compared before and after implementation of the order set. The primary objective was to evaluate differences in oral morphine equivalents 24 h prior to discharge before and after implementation of the multimodal analgesia order sets. RESULTS: One hundred and fourteen patients in the preimplementation group and 121 patients in the postimplementation group met inclusion criteria. Oral morphine equivalents did not differ significantly between the cohorts, 21.3 [0-53.5] OME in 2018 versus 18.8 [0-56.3] in 2020 (P = 0.85). Pain scores 24 h prior to discharge, 6 [4-8] versus 5.7 [3.5-7] (P = 0.4), did not differ significantly between groups despite more operations in the 2020 cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a multimodal order set was not associated with significant reduction in the amount of opioids used in non-intensive care unit trauma patients. However, pain scores were unchanged despite an increased number of procedures performed suggesting that multimodal analgesia sets may be a useful tool to aid in decreasing opioid utilization after traumatic injuries.

Duration of Antibiotic Therapy for General Medicine and General Surgery Patients Throughout Transitions of Care: An Antibiotic Stewardship Opportunity for Noninfectious Disease Pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Overuse of antibiotics from the inpatient to outpatient setting is an antibiotic stewardship initiative where noninfectious disease (ID) pharmacists can have a large impact. Our purpose was to evaluate antibiotic durations across transitions of care from the inpatient to outpatient setting. METHODS: This is a single-center, retrospective cohort analysis evaluating antibiotic durations from the inpatient and outpatient setting in adult patients admitted to general surgery and medicine services at an academic medical center between January 1, 2017 and September 20, 2017. The primary outcome was to assess total antibiotic duration for patients with uncomplicated and complicated urinary tract infections (UTI, cUTI), community-acquired pneumonia (CAP), and hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP). Outpatient electronic discharge prescriptions were used to calculate intended antibiotic duration upon transitions of care. Excessive duration of therapy was defined as >3 days-UTI, >5 days-CAP, and >7 days-cUTI or HAP. RESULTS: One hundred and one patients met inclusion criteria. Overall, most of the patients (81%) had antibiotics longer than recommended with only 3% receiving less than the recommended duration. Median total duration of therapy compared with recommended duration specified in national guidelines was UTI: 10 days [7 -10], cUTI: 12 days [7.5-12.5], CAP: 7 days [7 -9], HAP: 10 days [8 -12]. The median antibiotic duration was shorter in patients with no cultures or culture negative results compared with patients with positive cultures for all indications (UTI: 10.3 vs 10.8 days, cUTI: 9 vs 12 days, CAP: 8 vs 9.1 days, HAP: 10.5 vs 19.8 days). Overall, the recommended duration of antibiotics was completed while inpatient in 34.7%, but varied by infection. More patients with UTI or cUTI completed recommended duration of therapy while inpatient vs for CAP or HAP (53.8% vs 28%, P = .03). Eighty percent of those with UTI, 18.2% with cUTI, 25.6% with CAP, and 31.2% with HAP had already received the recommended duration of treatment, or more, on day of hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: The median duration of antibiotic therapy for all indications evaluated was longer than recommended in national guidelines. Opportunities for stewardship by non-ID pharmacists to impact postdischarge antimicrobial use at transitions of care have been identified.

Combating the Opioid Epidemic in Acute General Surgery: Reframing Inpatient Acute Pain Management.

BACKGROUND: The devastating effects of the opioid epidemic are well documented. We implemented a surgeon/pharmacist opioid reduction initiative at an academic medical center that incorporated multimodal pain therapy in an attempt to reduce total inpatient opioids prescribed. We hypothesized that less opioids would be used postoperatively without affecting pain scores or length of stay. METHODS: This single-center observational cohort analysis included patients admitted to the acute general surgical service and had one of 10 emergent general surgical (nontrauma) procedures. Patients who underwent surgery before the opioid reduction initiative were compared with patients who underwent surgery postinitiative. The primary objective was to evaluate differences in daily oral morphine equivalents and average pain scores in patients before and after implementation of the surgeon/pharmacist initiative. RESULTS: Eighty-three patients in the preopioid reduction initiative group and 92 patients in the postopioid reduction initiative group met inclusion criteria. Oral morphine equivalents were significantly different at 24 h before discharge when comparing across both year (P = 0.032) and number of procedures (P = 0.013). Our results showed decreased opioid utilization in the postopioid reduction initiative group on all observed postoperative days with unaffected pain scores. CONCLUSIONS: An opioid reduction initiative showed promise in lowering the number of opioids used during inpatient admission without affecting pain scores in emergent general surgical procedures. This initiative can be easily reproduced at other institutions to help combat the opioid epidemic.

Management of Acute Surgical Pain in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery.

SUMMARY: Fewer than half of all patients undergoing surgery report adequate postoperative pain relief. Poorly managed postoperative pain can lead to complications, increased hospital stays, prolonged rehabilitation, and a decreased quality of life. Pain rating scales are commonly used to identify, manage, and track the perceived intensity of pain. Changes in perceived pain severity and intensity are a key indicator for course of treatment. Postoperative pain is best treated with multimodal management with a variety of analgesic medications and techniques that target different receptors and mechanisms of action in the peripheral and central nervous systems. This includes systemic analgesia, regional analgesia, local analgesia (eg, topical and tumescent analgesia), and nonpharmacologic modalities. It is recommended that this approach is individually tailored and discussed through a shared decision-making approach. This review provides an overview of multimodal management for acute postoperative pain related to plastic surgery procedures. To increase patient satisfaction and provide effective pain control, it is recommended to educate patients on expectations of pain, multimodal options for pain control (including peripheral nerve blocks), complications of unrelieved pain, tracking and monitoring of pain by self-reporting, and how to reduce the use of opioid-based pain medication.

Analysis of Adverse Effects of Multimodal Gabapentin in Abdominal Wall Reconstruction.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesia, a key component of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols, emphasizes the use of nonopioid analgesics. Preoperative and postoperative gabapentin is often included within multimodal analgesia because it has been shown to reduce postoperative opioid use. However, the role of gabapentin has been questioned because of concerns of adverse effects, particularly in the elderly. In an effort to better understand the specific role of gabapentin within the context of an established enhanced recovery after surgery protocol, the authors studied the prevalence of its adverse effects in patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction. METHODS: Following institutional review board approval, a retrospective review of a prospectively collected database of 267 consecutive patients who underwent abdominal wall reconstruction performed by a single surgeon was conducted. Demographic variables; operative details; postoperative analgesic use; the presence of dizziness, lightheadedness, or altered mental status; hypotension; negative Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale scores; and postoperative falls were recorded and analyzed according to postoperative gabapentin administration. RESULTS: Two hundred thirteen patients (80 percent) met inclusion criteria, of which 138 (65 percent) received postoperative gabapentin. Postoperative gabapentin use was not associated with dizziness, lightheadedness, or altered mental status; hypotension; negative Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale scores; or falls. Furthermore, even among those aged 65 years or older, postoperative gabapentin use was not significantly associated with these adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing abdominal wall reconstruction, postoperative gabapentin administration was not associated with an increase in adverse effects. Further prospective analysis may better allow the characterization of the adverse effects of perioperative gabapentin. CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Therapeutic, III.

A Cost-Minimization Analysis Evaluating the Use of Liposomal Bupivacaine in Reconstructive Plastic Surgery Procedures.

BACKGROUND: Postsurgical pain management is critical to patient satisfaction and value. Several studies have evaluated liposomal bupivacaine in postoperative pain management protocols; however, its economic feasibility remains undefined. This study analyzes the economic impact of liposomal bupivacaine using a national claims database to assess postoperative clinical and financial outcomes in plastic and reconstructive procedures. METHODS: The Vizient Clinical Data Base/Resource Manager electronic database was reviewed for plastic surgery procedures (i.e., abdominoplasty, abdominal wall reconstruction, mastectomy with immediate tissue expander placement, mastectomy with direct-to-implant reconstruction, autologous breast reconstruction, and augmentation mammaplasty) at participating hospitals from July 1, 2016, to July 1, 2017. The main outcome measures were the length of stay; 7-, 14-, and 30-day readmission rates; and direct and total costs observed. RESULTS: During the study period, 958 total cases met inclusion criteria. Liposomal bupivacaine was used in 239 cases (25 percent). Compared with cases that did not use liposomal bupivacaine, liposomal bupivacaine cases had a decreased length of stay (9.2 days versus 5.8 days), decreased cost (total cost, $39,531 versus $28,021; direct cost, $23,960 versus $17,561), and lower 30-day readmission rates (4 percent versus 0 percent). The 14- and 7-day readmission rates were similar between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of liposomal bupivacaine may contribute to a reduction in length of stay, hospital costs, and 30-day readmission rates for abdominal and breast reconstructive procedures, which could contribute to a favorable economic profile from a system view. Focusing on the measurement and improvement of value in the context of whole, definable, patient processes will be important as we transition to value-based payments.