The Association of ICH Exclusion Criteria With Mortality and Disability Rates in ICH Patients Receiving 4F-PCC for Anticoagulation Reversal.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial hemorrhage (ICH) exclusion criteria in the landmark four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) trial have not been incorporated into clinical practice and incremental predictive ability is unknown. OBJECTIVES: Evaluate the association of meeting at least 1 ICH exclusion criterion with the composite end point in-hospital mortality and modified Rankin Scale [mRS] score 5 or 6. Determine the number and combination of criteria associated with poor outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective review of adult ICH patients who received 4F-PCC for anticoagulant reversal. Patient demographics, ICH exclusion criteria, in-hospital mortality, disability, and disposition were collected. χ2 Analysis and logistic regression were used to assess differences between patients with and without ICH exclusion criteria. RESULTS: Data from 167 patients were analyzed: 103 (61.7%) met at least 1 ICH exclusion criterion. The composite end point occurred more in those with at least 1 ICH exclusion criterion (74.8% vs 39%; P < 0.0001). Presence of 2 or more ICH exclusion criteria was associated with higher odds of the composite end point, higher mRS score, and long-term care facility disposition (P < 0.0001). Glasgow Coma Scale score <7 and at least 1 other ICH exclusion criterion had negative effects on composite end point and mortality: 95% to 100% and 85% to 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Patients meeting at least 1 ICH exclusion criterion had greater death/disability compared with those who did not. More ICH exclusion criteria were associated with higher rates of death, disability, and worse disposition. These data may aid in developing optimal 4F-PCC use criteria.

Push dose pressors: Experience in critically ill patients outside of the operating room.

PURPOSE: Evaluate push dose vasopressor (PDP) practice patterns, efficacy, and safety in critically ill patients. METHODS: Critically ill patients receiving phenylephrine or ephedrine PDP from November 2015-March 2017 were included. Patient demographics, medication administration details, vital signs pre- and post-administration, adverse effects, and medications errors were collected. Descriptive data are presented and comparisons were made with paired samples t-test, Wilcoxon Rank Sum and Chi-squared analysis or Fisher's Exact Test as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 146 patients (155 PDP events) were included; mean age 64.5 ±â€¯13.3 years and 66.4% males, respiratory failure (39.8%) or sepsis (24.9%) admission diagnosis. The surgical intensive care unit (ICU) (44.5%) and medical ICU (33.6%) used PDPs most often, and during the peri-intubation period (57.3%) or for other transient hypotension (38.2%). Following PDP, mean systolic blood pressure (BP), diastolic BP, and heart rate (HR) increased 32.5% (80 to 106 mmHg), 27.2% (48 to 61 mmHg), and 6.4% (93 to 99 bpm), respectively. There were 17 (11.6%) adverse events; most often related to excessive increases in BP or HR and one incidence of dysrhythmia. Thirteen patients (11.2%) had a dose related medication error (phenylephrine dose >200 µg or ephedrine dose >25 mg), nine (6.2%) received PDP with normal/elevated hemodynamics (systolic BP > 100 mmHg or HR > 160 bpm) and 15% while on a continuous infusion vasopressor. CONCLUSION: PDPs were used in a variety of patient diagnoses and for select indications. Overall, they were efficacious but associated with adverse drug events and medication errors.

Management of Intracranial Pressure: Part I: Pharmacologic Interventions.

Dangerous, sustained elevation in intracranial pressure (ICP) is a risk for any patient following severe brain injury. Intracranial pressure elevations that do not respond to initial management are considered refractory to treatment, or rICP. Patients are at significant risk of secondary brain injury and permanent loss of function resulting from rICP. Both nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions are utilized to intervene when a patient experiences either elevation in ICP or rICP. In part 1 of this 2-part series, pharmacologic interventions are discussed. Opioids, sedatives, osmotic diuretics, hypertonic saline solutions, and barbiturates are drug classes that may be used in an attempt to normalize ICP and prevent secondary injury. Nursing care of these patients includes collaboration with an interprofessional team and is directed toward patient and family comfort. The utilization of an evidence-based guideline for the management of rICP is strongly encouraged to improve patient outcomes.