RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: The use of albumin resuscitation in septic shock is only recommended in patients who have received large volumes of crystalloid resuscitation regardless of serum albumin concentration. The role of albumin is still largely debated and evidence to support its use still lacking. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate whether albumin replacement increases the number of vasopressor-free days in patients with septic shock and hypoalbuminemia. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted to assess the effect of albumin replacement in septic shock. Hypoalbuminemic patients with septic shock who received albumin were retrospectively compared with a cohort who did not. The primary outcome was number of vasopressor-free days at day 14 from shock presentation, which was analyzed using an adjusted linear regression model to adjust for confounders. RESULTS: There was no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients who received albumin versus those who did not, after adjusting for confounders of exposure (0.50, 95% CI = -0.97 to 1.97; P = 0.502). There also was no difference in secondary outcomes except for need for invasive mechanical ventilation (MV), which was significantly lower in patients who received albumin (61 [54.4%] vs 88 [67.7%]; P = 0.035). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: We observed no difference in vasopressor-free days at day 14 in patients with hypoalbuminemia who received albumin compared with those who did not. However, patients who received albumin required significantly less MV although further studies are warranted to assess this effect.
RESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
COVID-19, the clinical syndrome caused by the novel coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2, continues to rapidly spread, leading to significant stressors on global healthcare infrastructure. The manifestations of COVID-19 in solid organ transplant recipients are only beginning to be understood with cases reported to date in transplant recipients on chronic immunosuppression. Herein, we report the first case of COVID-19 in a lung transplant recipient in the immediate posttransplant period, and we describe the epidemiologic challenges in identifying the source of infection in this unique situation.
Asunto(s)
Betacoronavirus , Infecciones por Coronavirus/diagnóstico , Trasplante de Pulmón , Neumonía Viral/diagnóstico , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Receptores de Trasplantes , Adulto , Anciano , COVID-19 , Infecciones por Coronavirus/epidemiología , Infecciones por Coronavirus/terapia , Femenino , Humanos , Inmunosupresores , Pandemias , Neumonía Viral/epidemiología , Neumonía Viral/terapia , Radiografía Torácica , SARS-CoV-2 , Tomografía Computarizada por Rayos XRESUMEN
BackgroundAll Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE) pharmacy rotations at a large academic medical center were converted to virtual experiences during the beginning of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic. Objective: This study aimed to describe information obtained through pre- and post-rotation surveys, implemented to improve experiences for future students who may be required to complete virtual APPE pharmacy rotations. Methods: A single-center, descriptive study was conducted at a 1382-bed academic medical center. A pre- and post-rotation survey was sent to 32 students, and a post-rotation survey was sent to 38 preceptors via email to assess newly implemented virtual rotations. Results: Students' response rate for pre- and post-rotation surveys was 59% and 41%, respectively, and the preceptors' response rate for the post-rotation survey was 37%. A statistically significant improvement in videoconferencing abilities after the rotation was found for students but no differences in other skills were noted. In the post-rotation survey, students rated all of the following areas as being "effective": rotation as a whole, virtual topic and patient discussions; but were "neutral" regarding the utility of the introductory training guide. In the post-rotation survey, preceptors rated all of the following areas as being "effective": rotation as a whole, virtual topic and patient discussions. Conclusion: Abrupt shifts to virtual pharmacy clinical rotations due to COVID-19 have led to many challenges. Both students and preceptors felt that virtual rotations were an effective alternative to in-person experiences; however, further studies are warranted to evaluate actual performance compared to perceived effectiveness.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Educación a Distancia , Educación en Farmacia , Servicio de Farmacia en Hospital , Farmacia , Estudiantes de Farmacia , Humanos , PreceptoríaRESUMEN
Background: Dexmedetomidine is used in neurocritical care units (NCCUs) due to the light, dose-dependent sedation, and anxiolysis provided. It is unknown how to dose dexmedetomidine in obese patients. The primary objective is to assess the ability to achieve the goal Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) measurements in obese patients with a neurological injury who are solely on dexmedetomidine before and after an institutional dosing change from actual body weight (ABW) to adjusted body weight (AdjBW). Methods: This study included patients admitted to the NCCU with a neurological condition, required dexmedetomidine for at least 8 h as a sole sedative, and weighed ≥120% of ideal body weight. Percentage of RASS measurements within the goal range (-1 to +1) during the first 48 h while on dexmedetomidine were compared between patients dosed on ABW and on AdjBW. Results: Sixty-eight patients in the ABW cohort and 72 patients in the AdjBW cohort were included. There were no statistical differences between the two groups (ABW vs. AdjBW) in the percent of RASS measurements in the goal range (53.2% ± 34.8% vs. 55% ± 37%; P = 0.78), mean weight (99.2 ± 26 vs. 96.8 ± 20.9 kg; P = 0.55), or the average dose of dexmedetomidine required to achieve first goal RASS score (0.4 ± 0.3 vs. 0.4 ± 0.3 mcg/kg/h; P = 0.98). Conclusions: Dosing dexmedetomidine using AdjBW in obese critically ill neurologically injured patients for ongoing sedation resulted in no statistical difference in the percent of RASS measurements within the goal when compared to ABW dosing. Further studies are warranted.
RESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Dexmedetomidina , Humanos , Adolescente , Enfermedad Crítica/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Hipnóticos y Sedantes , Dolor , Unidades de Cuidados IntensivosRESUMEN
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.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Previous literature showed an association between hyperthermia and dexmedetomidine (DEX) use for ongoing sedation in non-obese patients. The purpose of this study is to evaluate DEX's effect on temperature in obese critically ill patients. METHODS: This single center, retrospective, cohort study included patients ≥18 years, admitted to a surgical or medical ICU, received DEX for ≥8 hours as a single continuous infusion sedative, and weighed ≥120% of ideal body weight. Patients were excluded if they had a fever (≥38°C) and positive cultures within 48 hours of DEX initiation. The primary endpoint was a fever (Tmax of ≥38°C) within 48 hours of DEX initiation. RESULTS: A total of 186 patients were included for evaluation. Forty-two patients (22.5%) had a fever during the first 48 hours of DEX initiation. Median weight was not different between the febrile and afebrile groups (99.4 [90.6-122.4] vs 97.6 [81.6-114.2] kg, P = .6). Median change from baseline temperature for all patients within 48 hours was an increase of .5 (.1-.8) °C, P < .001. In multiple regression analysis, duration of DEX and baseline temperature were the only significant predictors of fever development with an adjusted odds ratio of 1.041 (95% CI 1.009-1.074, P = .012) and 7.058 (95% CI 3.307-15.064, P < .001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that there is a significant increase in body temperature from baseline for obese patients on DEX. Duration of DEX and baseline temperature were found to be risk factors for fever development in this population. Further studies are warranted.
RESUMEN
PURPOSE: The disparity between the number of applicants for postgraduate year 1 (PGY1) pharmacy residency positions and the number of available residency positions increases the need to optimize how applicants are evaluated. The purpose of the study described here was to evaluate the correlation of ratings of residency candidate characteristics by academic and professional references listed on residency applications with overall application score, applicant ranking, and the likelihood of candidates receiving an invitation to interview. METHODS: A multicenter, retrospective study was conducted to evaluate the correlation of reference writers' ratings of 13 candidate characteristics and their overall recommendations with program-determined outcomes (eg, final application score, applicant ranking, and invitation to interview) through analysis of PGY1 applications submitted through the Pharmacy Online Residency Centralized Application System (PhORCAS) from 2015 through 2018. Keywords and themes within the open-ended section of letters of reference were also analyzed for correlation with overall application score. RESULTS: A total of 5,923 references listed on 1,867 applications to 4 PGY1 pharmacy residency programs processed by PhORCAS were included in the analysis. For the majority of applicant characteristic ratings (ie, 74% of 56,872 ratings overall), reference writers rated candidates as exceeding expectations, and applicants were "highly recommended" by these evaluators in 91% of cases. References' average characteristic ratings and overall recommendations were poorly correlated with final application score (R2 = 0.12 [P < 0.0001] and R2 = 0.08 [P < 0.0001], respectively), final ranking (R2 = 0.02 [P < 0.0001] and R2 = 0.03 [P < 0.0001], respectively), and invitation to interview (R2 = 0.07 [P < 0.0001] and R2 = 0.04 [P < 0.0001], respectively). For the themes evaluated, references' use of teaching words best correlated with normalized final application score, although the correlation was poor (R2 = 0.007, P = 0.0001). CONCLUSION: Reference writers' ratings of PGY1 residency candidate characteristics in PhORCAS are poorly correlated with application score, applicant ranking, and invitation to interview. The results of this study suggest that the existing PhORCAS standardized form for submitting references is of limited utility in its current state.