Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Paediatr Child Health ; 26(3): e152-e157, 2021 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33936345

ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION: Due to the nonspecific clinical presentation, clinicians often empirically treat newborns at risk of early-onset sepsis (EOS). Recently, the Canadian Paediatric Society (CPS) published updated recommendations that promote a more judicious approach to EOS management. OBJECTIVE: To examine the compliance with the CPS statement at a tertiary perinatal site and characterize the types of deviations. METHODS: A retrospective chart review was conducted for all term and late pre-term newborns at risk for sepsis, between January 1 and June 30, 2018. The prevalence of newborns with EOS risk factors was measured during the first month. Management strategies for eligible newborns during the 6-month period were compared to the CPS recommendations to establish the rate of noncompliance. The type of noncompliance, readmission rate, and rate of culture-positive EOS were examined. RESULTS: In the first month, 29% (66 of 228) of newborns had EOS risk factors. Among the 100 newborns born in the 6-month period for whom the CPS recommendations apply, 47 (47%) received noncompliant management. Of those, 51% (N=24) had inappropriately initiated investigations, 17% (N=8) had inappropriate antibiotics, and 32% (N=15) had both. The rate of readmission for a septic workup was 1.6% (N= 2). None had culture-positive sepsis while admitted. CONCLUSION: A large proportion of term and late preterm newborns (29%) had EOS risk factors, but none had culture-confirmed EOS. The rate of noncompliance with the CPS recommendations was high (47%), mainly due to overzealous management. Future initiatives should aim at increasing compliance, particularly in newborns at lower EOS risk.

2.
Ann Pharmacother ; 52(4): 332-337, 2018 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29099233

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Dangerous abbreviations on the Institute for Safe Medication Practices Canada's "Do Not Use" list have resulted in medication errors leading to harm. Data comparing rates of use of dangerous abbreviations in paper and electronic medication orders are limited. OBJECTIVE: To compare rates of use of dangerous abbreviations from the "Do Not Use" list, in paper and electronic medication orders. Secondary objectives include determining the proportion of patients at risk for medication errors due to dangerous abbreviations and the most commonly used dangerous abbreviations. METHODS: One-day cross-sectional audits of medication orders were conducted at a 6-site hospital network in Toronto, Canada, between December 2013 and January 2014. Proportions of paper and electronic medication orders containing dangerous abbreviation(s) were compared using a χ2 test. The proportion of patients with at least 1 medication order containing dangerous abbreviation(s) and the top 5 dangerous abbreviations used were described. RESULTS: Overall, 255 patient charts were reviewed. The proportions of paper and electronic medication orders containing dangerous abbreviation(s) were 172/714 (24.1%) and 9/2207 (0.4%), respectively ( P < 0.001). Almost one-third of patients had medication order(s) containing dangerous abbreviation(s). The proportions of patients with at least 1 medication order during the audit period containing dangerous abbreviation(s) for patients with paper only, electronic only, or a hybrid of paper and electronic medication orders were 50.5%, 5%, and 47.2%, respectively. Those most commonly used were "D/C", drug name abbreviations, "OD," "cc," and "U." CONCLUSIONS: Electronic medication orders have significantly lower rates of dangerous abbreviation use compared to paper medication orders.


Subject(s)
Drug Prescriptions , Electronic Prescribing , Medication Errors , Cross-Sectional Studies , Humans , Ontario
3.
CANNT J ; 24(2): 45-7; quiz 48-9, 2014.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25276990

ABSTRACT

There now exists current evidence that the initiation of statin therapy in patients on hemodialysis does not provide the same cardiovascular benefit as in non-hemodialysis patients. The KDIGO guidelines suggest not to initiate statin therapy in hemodialysis-dependent CKD patients, but to continue therapy in patients who are already on a statin at the time of hemodialysis initiation. A closer monitoring of myopathy is warranted for hemodialysis patients on a statin therapy.


Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Education, Nursing, Continuing , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/adverse effects , Muscular Diseases/etiology , Nephrology Nursing/education , Renal Dialysis/adverse effects , Renal Insufficiency/therapy , Adult , Aged , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , Female , Humans , Hydroxymethylglutaryl-CoA Reductase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Male , Middle Aged , Muscular Diseases/prevention & control , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Renal Insufficiency/complications , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL