Pharmacologic Management of Cerebral Vasospasm in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage.

Aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) is responsible for 5% to 10% of all strokes in the United States annually and is a neurologic emergency with considerable morbidity and mortality. A common complication of aSAH is cerebral vasospasm (CVS) or narrowing of the cerebral arteries. While nearly 70% of aSAH patients will develop CVS, approximately 30% of those patients will go on to develop delayed cerebral ischemia, defined as symptomatic vasospasm or cerebral infarction demonstrated on imaging. While the pathophysiology of CVS is unclear, the prevention and treatment of this complication are a focus of ongoing research. Despite continued efforts, only one medication, nimodipine, is Food and Drug Administration approved for the improvement of neurologic outcomes by reducing the incidence and severity of ischemic deficits in patients with CVS during aSAH. This review provides nurse practitioners and the bedside nursing staff with a summary of the available literature on the pharmacologic management of CVS. It focuses on oral, intravenous, intra-arterial, and intraventricular medications available in the United States that may be utilized in the management of CVS.

Comparison of nimodipine formulations and administration techniques via enteral feeding tubes in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A multicenter retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Nimodipine improves outcomes following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH) and current guidelines suggest that patients with aSAH receive nimodipine for 21 days. Patients with no difficulty swallowing will swallow the whole capsules or tablets; otherwise, nimodipine liquid must be drawn from capsules, tablets need to be crushed, or the commercially available liquid product be used to facilitate administration through an enteral feeding tube (FT). It is not clear whether these techniques are equivalent. The goal of the study was to determine if different nimodipine formulations and administration techniques were associated with the safety and effectiveness of nimodipine in aSAH. METHODS: This was a retrospective multicenter observational cohort study conducted in 21 hospitals across North America. Patients admitted with aSAH and received nimodipine by FT for ≥3 days were included. Patient demographics, disease severity, nimodipine administration, and study outcomes were collected. Safety end points included the prevalence of diarrhea and nimodipine dose reduction or discontinuation secondary to blood pressure reduction. Predictors of the study outcomes were analyzed using regression modeling. RESULTS: A total of 727 patients were included. Administration of nimodipine liquid product was independently associated with higher prevalence of diarrhea compared to other administration techniques/formulations (Odds ratio [OR] 2.28, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41-3.67, p-value = 0.001, OR 2.76, 95% CI 1.37-5.55, p-value = 0.005, for old and new commercially available formulations, respectively). Bedside withdrawal of liquid from nimodipine capsules prior to administration was significantly associated with higher prevalence of nimodipine dose reduction or discontinuation secondary to hypotension (OR 2.82, 95% CI 1.57-5.06, p-value = 0.001). Tablet crushing and bedside withdrawal of liquid from capsules prior to administration were associated with increased odds of delayed cerebral ischemia (OR 6.66, 95% CI 3.48-12.74, p-value <0.0001 and OR 3.92, 95% CI 2.05-7.52, p-value <0.0001, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that enteral nimodipine formulations and administration techniques might not be equivalent. This could be attributed to excipient differences, inconsistency and inaccuracy in medication administration, and altered nimodipine bioavailability. Further studies are needed.

Lean into Clinical Pharmacy: An Experience in Implementing Key Performance Indicators and Gemba Walks into Clinical Pharmacy Services.

Purpose: The Lean methodology was applied to clinical metrics by a critical care pharmacy team. The experiences associated with the development and implementation of clinical metrics and their impact on daily workflow are described. Summary: The Lean methodology has been introduced into the healthcare system as a means of process improvement, which can eliminate waste through appropriate medication utilization. At OhioHealth Riverside Methodist Hospital, the department of pharmacy was tasked with the development of clinical metrics after a health system wide Gemba walk was initiated. The pharmacy department's critical care team developed a strategy identifying and evaluating clinical metrics pertaining to their everyday workflow. Each clinical metric was evaluated in accordance with a pre-defined goal. Metrics requiring heavy documentation and those in which the pharmacist does not have autonomous authority to manage were often challenging to implement and were less successful. Throughout this process, the lessons learned focused on generating ideas that were easily documented, evidence-based, and department specific. The critical care team discovered that the outcome of the most successful metrics highlighted clinical pharmacist value and data generated could be used to support funding for additional resources. Conclusion: The critical care pharmacy team developed a streamlined process to implement clinical metrics as means of identifying areas for improvement using the Lean methodology.