Description and Disposition of Patients With Cancer Accessing a Novel, Pharmacist-Led Cannabis Consultation Service.

PURPOSE: The Cannabis Consultation Service (CCS) is an innovative pharmacist-led resource at the Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre. Its mandate is to provide education and guide patients through access and appropriate use of high-quality plant-derived cannabinoids (PDCs). Our objective was to describe the CCS, explain its processes, and characterize patient disposition with respect to use of PDCs. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the charts of patients referred to the CCS from July 13, 2020, to March 05, 2021. We used descriptive statistics to report on the patient population and service metrics. RESULTS: During the 34-week period, 96 patients accessed the CCS (median age, 61 years). The top reasons for CCS consultation were management of cancer pain, insomnia, and general interest. Medical cannabis was supported as an option in 44/96 patients. Reasons for not supporting PDC use included lack of indication, potential drug interaction/contraindication, or requiring treatment with first-line therapy. Of the 40 patients requiring a medical document, 22 initiated therapy. The most common product used was a 2:50 THC:CBD (Tetrahydrocannabinol:Cannabidiol) cannabis oil. At the date of last contact, few patients remained on therapy because of lack of benefit, patient choice, and/or hesitancy. CONCLUSION: Despite patients with cancer having interest in seeking PDCs for symptom management, only a few initiated and continued therapy. Pharmacists have an opportunity to advise patients and the oncology team on the risks and benefits of PDCs. These results can be used to support the development of medical cannabis programs by oncology centers and focus future research priorities.

Development and validation of a screening tool for early identification of bloodstream infection in acute burn injury patients.

BACKGROUND: Standard diagnostic criteria are not useful for identifying bloodstream infection in patients with an acute burn injury patients. The study objective was to develop and validate a tool using common laboratory, clinical, and patient parameters for early identification of bloodstream infection after acute burn injury (within 10 days after a burn). METHODS: We retrospectively and prospectively reviewed for tool development the hospital course of patients with an acute burn injury (n = 156) and validated the tool in different cohorts (retrospective [n = 26] and prospective [n = 90]). The Pearson correlation identified independent variables associated with bloodstream infection (P < .1) in the development cohort that were then analyzed using binary logistic regression to identify the simplest model (P < .05; adjusted odds ratio >1). Classification and regression tree analysis was used to identify tool parameter breakpoints. Performance metrics were completed to evaluate and validate the tool. RESULTS: The best model (P < .05) was: Ln [odds of bloodstream infection] = -96.749 + 3.230 (platelet volatility) + 2.235 (max temperature [°C]) + 0.339 (% full burn) + 0.242 (% partial burn) + 0.045 (max heart rate [bpm]), with a threshold probability categorizing bloodstream infection of >48%. The sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, false positive rate, false negative rate, and positive (+) and negative (-) likelihood ratios of the tool in the developmental cohort (n = 156) were 89%, 98%, 96%, 2%, 11%, 53, and 0·11, respectively; and in the prospective validation cohort (n = 90 were 91%, 90%, 90%, 10%, 9%, 9, and 0·1, respectively (n = 90). CONCLUSION: The validated bloodstream infection screening tool in patients with acute burn injury has excellent predictive ability to assist in the identification of patients for whom blood cultures should be requested.

Development of a process map for the delivery of virtual clinical pharmacy services at Odette Cancer Centre during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Virtual methods have been innovatively utilized to provide clinical and supportive care to patients with cancer. Oncology pharmacists have been actively involved in this movement, in order to minimize patient contact and decrease the risk of viral transmission for this high-risk group. In response to COVID-19 restrictions, the Odette Cancer Centre pharmacy modified the delivery of clinical pharmacy services (CPS), including medication histories and patient education/counseling, to a remote telephone-based model. Process maps were created to visualize workflow before and after the pandemic. Process metrics were tracked over a 6-week period. From March 25th to May 1st, 2020, 202 best-possible medication histories and baseline assessments were completed; 149 of these (74%) were completed remotely. For medication therapy counsels, 72 of 199 were completed remotely (36%). Despite workflow disruptions caused by the pandemic, these results demonstrate that clinical pharmacy service levels could be maintained by incorporating remote delivery approaches without significant investment in resources. Challenges included acceptance by patients and lack of technology to support system-level processes. Further research to develop, refine, and individualize virtual clinical pharmacy care models will help to consolidate the role of these approaches in the post-COVID-19 era.