Improving management of intravenous maintenance fluids in the emergency department of a university hospital.

OBJECTIVE: Intravenous (IV) fluid therapy is a known source of iatrogenic complications. Guideline implementation can be used to educate and guide physicians on adequate fluid management. In the emergency department (ED), a complex and interruption-driven environment, workload is high and active documentation is required to facilitate audits of fluid management quality. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fluid management was evaluated in the ED records of adult non-critically ill patients admitted to a tertiary care center before (PRE: 1/12/2016-31/3/2017) and after (POST: 1/12/2018-31/3/2019) implementation of an educational intervention aiming to optimize IV fluid therapy in November 2018. First, the appropriateness of the 24-hour IV maintenance fluid prescription was evaluated, as prescribed by the emergency physician. Second, factors associated with appropriate prescribing were assessed, as well as the quality of fluid management documentation practice. Prescription appropriateness and documentation quality were evaluated retrospectively using a structured audit instrument and additional review by experts. RESULTS: A total of 237 patients (2.3%) were included in the PRE-intervention group and 253 patients (2.4%) in the POST-intervention group. The expert panel evaluated 214 prescriptions in 82.3% of patients (PRE: 99, POST: 115), and appropriateness increased significantly (19.2% vs. 61.2%, p=0.002). A higher odds of an appropriate IV maintenance fluid prescription was determined, attributed to the intervention (adjOR=2.580; 95% CI 1.363-4.884) and in patients having a prehospital intervention (adjOR=1.914, 95% CI 1.022-3.586). Appropriateness of fluid management documentation did not significantly improve after the implementation of the intervention (15.6% vs. 16.2%, p=0.858). CONCLUSIONS: The IV fluid prescriptions' appropriateness was significantly higher after guideline implementation. However, documentation quality of fluid management was poor in the studied ED records. Active stewardship programs are warranted to further monitor fluid management quality in the ED.

Clinical trials with direct oral anticoagulants for stroke prevention in atrial fibrillation: how representative are they for real life patients?

PURPOSE: To identify the proportion of real-life patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) eligible for direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC) therapy, based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria used in the clinical studies and based on the officially approved indications as mentioned in the Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC). METHODS: Data for this retrospective cross-sectional study was extracted from the UZ Brussel Stroke Registry, containing anonymized data of 2205 patients with a suspected stroke. Characteristics of patients with documented AF were compared with the patient characteristics in clinical trials and the approved indications in the SmPC. RESULTS: Data of 468 patients with AF was analyzed. Based on the selection criteria of the clinical trials, significantly less patients were eligible for treatment with rivaroxaban compared to dabigatran etexilate (39.3 versus 47.6 %; p = 0.010), but not compared to apixaban (45.5 %; p = 0.055). Based on the indications and contraindications in the SmPC, significantly fewer patients were eligible for apixaban compared to dabigatran etexilate and rivaroxaban (62.0 % for apixaban, 72.9 % for dabigatran etexilate, and 75.6 % for rivaroxaban; p < 0.001 and p < 0.001, respectively). Significantly, more patients were eligible for DOAC therapy based on the indications and contraindications in the SmPC compared to the inclusion and exclusion criteria of the clinical trials (72.9 versus 47.6 %; p < 0.001 for dabigatran; 75.6 versus 39.3 %; p < 0.001 for rivaroxaban and 62.0 versus 45.5 %; p < 0.001 for apixaban). CONCLUSION: When taking into account the selection criteria from the pivotal clinical trials with DOACs for stroke prevention in AF, less than half of real-life patients are eligible for therapy with one of the DOACs. However, the indications mentioned in the SmPCs of these drugs are less strict.

Relationship between pre-stroke cardiovascular medication use and stroke severity.

INTRODUCTION: Stroke is a major health problem with important morbidity and mortality. Various risk factors and cardiovascular medication groups are known to have an influence on stroke incidence, but less is known about the relation between medication use and stroke severity. AIM: To determine if relationships exist between the pre-stroke cardiovascular medication use and stroke severity. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted on a database with anonymized data of 1974 patients with a suspected stroke, admitted to the Universitair Ziekenhuis (UZ) Brussel. Stroke severity was quantified using the National Institute of Health Stroke Scale (NIHSS). Cardiovascular medication groups were first included in a multivariable linear regression model. Second, to obtain clinically interpretable results, all variables that were retained in the final linear regression model were introduced in a cumulative odds ordinal logistic regression model with proportional odds. RESULTS: Angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs), statins, and antiarrhythmics were significantly associated with stroke severity at the 10 % α level in a multivariable linear regression model, suggesting a possible effect of these medication groups on stroke severity. Only pre-stroke statin use showed a significant relationship with the NIHSS score in the ordinal logistic regression model with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.740 (95 % CI 0.580-0.944; p = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Pre-stroke use of statins is significantly associated with lower stroke severity. No significant relationship was detected between pre-stroke use of other medication groups and stroke severity, defined by the NIHSS score.

Comparison of two approaches of INR-follow-up and determinants of INR-stability.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with atrial fibrillation (AF) and treated with coumarins need a close follow-up of the international normalized ratio (INR)-values. This can be done by the general practitioner (GP) or by a haematologist in an outpatient hospital clinic. OBJECTIVE: To compare both ways of follow-up and to investigate determinants of stable INR-patterns. METHODS: Cross-sectional single-centre study in patients with AF treated at the UZ Brussel, a university hospital in Brussels. Of the 113 patients included in the study, 71 had their INR followed-up by their GP and 42 similar patients were followed-up by a haematologist. Data of these 113 patients were further analysed to identify possible determinants for stable INR-values. RESULTS: The time in therapeutic range (TTR) did not significantly differ between both groups. However, patients in the GP-group had significantly more INR-values under 2.0 compared to patients from the haematologist-group (P = 0.044), whereas patients in the haematologist-group had significantly more INR-values above 3.0 compared to patients from the GP-group (P = 0.038). Reimbursement costs of both ways of follow-up were comparable, but the out-of-pocket costs for the patient were lower in the GP-group. The time since AF diagnosis was the only significant determinant predicting a higher TTR. CONCLUSION: Both approaches of follow-up seem to lead to the same TTR, yielding no reason to advocate one approach above the other. However, the patient costs were lower when followed-up by the GP.

Pharmacists' role in handling problems with prescriptions for antithrombotic medication in Belgian community pharmacies.

BACKGROUND: Community pharmacists have an important task in the follow-up of patients treated with antithrombotics. When delivering these medicines, pharmacists can encounter drug-related problems (DRPs) with substantial clinical and economic impact. OBJECTIVE: To investigate the amount and type of antithrombotic related DRPs as well as how community pharmacists handled these DRPs. SETTING: Belgian community pharmacies. METHODS: MSc pharmacy students of six Belgian universities collected data about all DRPs encountered by a pharmacist during ten half days of their pharmacy internship. Data were registered about DRPs detected at delivery and in an a posteriori setting, when consulting the medical history of the patient. Classification of the DRP, cause of the DRP, intervention and result of the intervention were registered. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Amount and type of antotrombitocs related DRPs occurring in community pharmacies, as well as how community pharmacists handled these DRPs. RESULTS: 3.1 % of the 15,952 registered DRPs concerned antithrombotics. 79.3 % of these DRPs were detected at delivery and 20.7 % were detected a posteriori. Most antithrombotic-related DRPs concerned problems with the choice of the drug (mainly because of drug-drug interactions) or concerned logistic problems. Almost 80 % of the antithrombotic-related DRPs were followed by an intervention of the pharmacist, mainly at the patient's level, resulting in 90.1 % of these DRPs partially or totally solved. CONCLUSION: Different DRPs with antithrombotic medication occurred in Belgian community pharmacies. About 20 % was detected in an a posteriori setting, showing the benefit of medication review. Many of the encountered DRPs were of technical nature (60.7 %). These DRPs were time-consuming for the pharmacist to resolve and should be prevented. Most of the DRPs could be solved, demonstrating the added value of the community pharmacist as first line healthcare provider.

Physician's expectations regarding prescribing clinical decision support systems in a Belgian hospital.

OBJECTIVES: Developing and implementing clinical decision support systems (CDSSs) is time-consuming and costly. Therefore, prioritization of the most relevant systems is warranted. The physician's perceived usefulness has been identified as a decisive reason for using CDSSs. The objective of this study was to investigate the physician's perceived usefulness of different types of CDSSs and to identify the user needs and expectations regarding future CDSSs. METHODS: Cross-sectional single-centre survey among physicians with a clinical assignment in a university hospital. Physicians were questioned about their current experiences with drug prescribing and the perceived usefulness and desired features of future CDSSs. RESULTS: One hundred and sixty-four physicians completed the survey (52·6%). The majority acknowledged that it is very difficult to take all relevant information into account when prescribing drugs. Drug-drug interaction checking, drug-allergy checking, and dosing guidance were considered as most useful. Automated clinical guidelines and adverse drug event monitoring were considered as least useful. The user-friendliness of the systems, clinical relevance of the alerts, and prevention of alert fatigue were perceived as important aspects for a successful implementation. CONCLUSIONS: From the physicians' perspective drug-drug interaction checking, drug-allergy checking, and dosing guidance should receive the highest priority for development and implementation. Because the perceived usefulness has been identified as a decisive reason for using CDSSs, it seems feasible to take into account this prioritization when developing and implementing CDSSs. In order to overcome the physicians' perceived disadvantages, attention should go to the development of user-friendly systems that deliver clinical relevant alerts.

Relative efficacy and effectiveness assessment of new pharmaceuticals in three EU member states: current practices and outcome agreement between Belgium, the Netherlands and France.

PURPOSES: Relative efficacy and effectiveness assessment (REA) of a pharmaceutical product is critical in reimbursement decisions. The Pharmaceutical Forum (2005-2008) asked European Union (EU) member states (MS) to strengthen the methodological quality and rigor of REA and identify any scope for common approaches. Here, we have compared REA practices and results within three EU MS with similar reimbursement procedures for the period 2007-2010 to describe the actual situation. METHODS: Assessment procedures and reports from the Belgian, Dutch and French Agency websites were retrieved and corresponding products matched. The REA-outcome was coded as added therapeutic value (ATV) yes or no. The strength of agreement between the three MS was estimated and analyzed in relation to some explanatory variables. RESULTS: Of the 144 Belgian, 122 Dutch and 236 French assessment reports retrieved, ATV was granted in 35, 39 and 23 % of cases, respectively, with 72 matches between the three MS. In all MS the results of at least one randomized trial were available in >90 % of reports. Between two MS significant agreement was achieved in ≥ 72 % of cases; this was 54 % between the three MS. Differences in ATV existed for treatments in severe chronic diseases. Assessment procedures were poorly documented in Belgium and France. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings reveal that the three similar EU MS under study agree on the REA-outcome of only half of the new drugs. Differences in applied methodology (e.g. inferences from study results, handling of uncertainty) between MS may exist. We suggest that a joint REA approach would benefit from a common understanding and application of the scientific assessment process using shared guidelines.

Ethnic differences in drug utilization pattern during pregnancy: a cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the differences in exposure to medications in a cohort of multi-ethnic pregnant women. METHODS: Six hundred and forty-one pregnant women of Western, Arab/Turkish and "other origins" participated in this cross-sectional study using a questionnaire in a university hospital in Brussels, Belgium. Assessment of the drug safety was done using the food and drug administration (FDA) risk classification system. Data analysis was performed using SPSS (Chicago, IL). RESULTS: In overall cohort, 83.8% used at least one preparation (including multivitamins) during pregnancy and 37.0% of women used at least one drug (excluding multivitamins). Significantly more Western women (43.7%) used one or more medications compared to Arab/Turkish women (28.7%; p = 0.000). This difference in exposure was most pronounced for over-the-counter (OTC) drugs for occasional and pregnancy-related complaints, and was observed for potentially unsafe drugs or drugs with unknown safety. None of the women reported use of FDA X category drugs. CONCLUSIONS: The use of drugs known to be harmful was not observed, but a higher prevalence of exposure to potentially harmful drugs (FDA C/D) was found among Western women who also consumed more OTC drugs. This highlights the need for cautious prescribing for women in the fertile age in general and for continuous monitoring of medication use during pregnancy.

Iron status, iron supplementation and anemia in pregnancy: ethnic differences.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the anemia prevalence during pregnancy and the use of and response to iron supplementation in a multi-ethnic population as well as the possible association between anemia and birth outcomes (pregnancy duration, birth weight). METHODS: Cross-sectional study conducted in a university hospital (Brussels, Belgium) in 341 women. Hemoglobin, ferritin and iron prescription data were extracted from the patients' electronic dossiers; a questionnaire was used to assess iron intake during pregnancy. RESULTS: Anemia prevalence was higher during the 3rd trimester (24.3%) than in the 1st trimester (6.2%). Arab/Turkish women had a higher prevalence of anemia (9.1%) in the 1st trimester compared to Western women (2.4%; p = 0.044). The frequency of iron prescription was significantly higher among Arab/Turkish (43.7%) compared to Western women (27.9%; p = 0.006). A significantly lower mean birth weight was found among women presenting with anemia in the 1st trimester (3166 g) compared to non anemic women (3442 g; p = 0.036) but no significant difference was detected in mean pregnancy duration between both groups (p = 0.804). CONCLUSIONS: Anemia was more prevalent among Arab/Turkish women in spite of receiving more iron prescriptions than Western women. Efficient iron therapy and intensive follow-up are warranted to decrease the anemia prevalence during pregnancy, especially among non-Western women.

Are ACE-inhibitors or ARB's still needed for cardiovascular prevention in high risk patients? Insights from profess and transcend.

The HOPE and EUROPA clinical studies have shown that treatment with the angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, ramipril and perindopril, may reduce the occurrence of major cardiovascular events in patients with proven atherosclerotic disease. The recently published results of the PRoFESS and TRANSCEND trials completed the much needed information concerning the use of an angiotensin receptor blocker for patients at high risk of cardiovascular events. PROFESS compared a therapy of telmisartan 80 mg daily with placebo in patients with a recent ischemic stroke. The difference in the primary outcome of first recurrent stroke was not statistically significant between telmisartan and placebo. The secondary outcome of major cardiovascular events showed a relative risk reduction (RRR) of 7% in favour of telmisartan. This tended to be significant (p = 0.06) despite a rather short follow-up period of only 28 months. In TRANSCEND 5926 patients at high risk for cardiovascular events were randomized to a treatment with telmisartan 80 mg daily or placebo for a mean duration of follow-up of 56 months. The primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke or hospitalization for heart failure showed a non-significant 8% RRR in favour of the telmisartan treated patients. The main secondary outcome of cardiovascular death and myocardial infarction or stroke as used in the HOPE trial showed a non-significant RRR of 13% in favour of telmisartan treated patients (p = 0.068 adjusted for multiplicity of comparisons). In comparing the Kaplan-Meier curves for the endpoint of major cardiovascular events used in HOPE, EUROPA, TRANSCEND and PRoFESS, the trends are similar. Results of most of the recently published trials have been neutral.This could partly be explained by major improvements in the optimal background therapy of the patients included. Nevertheless, the results of PRoFESS and TRANSCEND do not contradict the results from previous studies with theACE inhibitors ramipril and perindopril and the ARB telmisartan.

Generics and cost-effective prescribing in Belgium: does bioequivalence always translate in therapeutic equivalence?

As many other countries, Belgium has a policy to promote the use of generic pharmaceutical products. In order to protect consumers, these generic products must be demonstrated to be essentially similar to the previously approved product, typically an innovator product. The therapeutic equivalence of a generic and an innovator product is most commonly based on the demonstration of bioequivalence, i.e. clinically insignificant differences in the rate and extent of drug absorption usually assessed from pharmacokinetic measurements, in a normal and healthy population. This article reviews the bioequivalence requirements for generic products and examines whether bioequivalence always adequately substantiates therapeutic equivalence and interchangeability. Clinical practice has identified a number of drug classes for which generic substitution should be approached with caution. Current bioequivalence requirements are based on a measure of average bioequivalence. There are fears that use of this measure may be inappropriate in the case of a drug with a narrow therapeutic range or high intrasubject or intersubject variability. Under these circumstances, measures of individual and population bioequivalence are proposed to be more accurate than measures of average bioequivalence. Bioequivalence issues are discussed together more general concerns about generic drug substitution, such as differences in product and packaging appearance and differences in excipients.

Generics: need for clinical concern?

The market of generic drugs is in continuous development in all countries, including Belgium. Their low cost explains their success in western and developed countries. However, clinical concerns have been raised when generics are used. Indeed, various studies suggest that generic substitution can be associated with reduced efficacy or (and) increased side-effects, particularly with drugs used in severe diseases or pathological states such as epilepsy, cardiac arrhythmia, prevention of graft-rejection, ... The generic drugs must have systemic bioavailability similar to that of the original drug. Thus, they have supposed similar therapeutic bioequivalence. However, similar pharmacokinetics does not imply identical therapeutic activity, particularly with drugs having narrow therapeutic indices such as anti-epileptics, anti-arrythmics ... In this case, switchability rather than prescribability may cause problems. Low pharmaceutical quality is more frequent when drugs are produced in certain countries, in some cases causing a real concern when activity and safety are considered.

Reimbursement of medicines in Belgium: role of evidence-based medicine.

The European Transparency Directive requires that pricing and reimbursement decisions must be taken in a transparent, objective and verifiable way with respect of strict timelines. The Belgian competent authority integrated on January 1st, 2002 Evidence-Based Medicine (EBM) principles in the reimbursement evaluation. The present work describes the procedures and investigates whether the introduction of the EBM principles indeed affects the decision and whether it compromised the respect of strict timelines. The reimbursement decision for all new submissions except for generic drugs is preceded by an evaluation of the relative therapeutic value. There were 1285 submissions handled within the period 2002-2004 of which 159 (12.4%) related to new molecular entities. For the 824 files with valuation of the therapeutic value, the reimbursement decision was positive in 80.8% of cases. The percentage of positive decisions was dependent on the type of submission with the lowest percentages for new molecular entities and submissions for new indications (64%-71%). Line extensions and generics received a positive decision in nearly all cases (> 95%). Proof of added value by at least 1 positive superiority trial against active comparator is a requirement for obtaining a price premium: this was granted in less than 50% of the 67 submissions claiming such superiority and the odds for a negative reimbursement decision increased significantly if the applicant failed to prove added value: O.R. = 9.1 (2.3 - 35.6), indicating that clinical evidence of added therapeutic value clearly facilitates reimbursement. The introduction of the new procedure did not jeopardize the timelines. Introducing EBM principles had a significant impact on reimbursement decisions in Belgium by facilitating reimbursement with a price premium of new drugs with added value addressing unmet medical needs.

Lessons from ONTARGET.

The recently published results of the ONTARGET trial shed a new light on the cardiovascular protection of patients at high risk of a cardiovascular event. Despite a number of trials looking at the efficacy of Angiotensin Converting Enzyme inhibitors (ACEis) or Angiotensin Receptor Blockers (ARBs) in the prevention of cardiovascular events in patients with specific high risk profiles, the question of the equivalence of ACEis and ARBs remained unanswered. The ONTARGET trial has shown that telmisartan 80 mg administered for a median duration of 4.5 years to patients at high risk of developing a major cardiovascular event, is equally effective to ramipril 10 mg. In addition, telmisartan was slightly better tolerated. The comparator ramipril has been chosen as it is currently the gold standard ACEi since the results of the HOPE study, in terms of the composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction and stroke. Moreover, ONTARGET is the first trial to test the hypothesis of superiority of adding an ARB (telmisartan 80 mg) to an ACEi (ramipril 10 mg) over the ACEi ramipril monotherapy in cardiovascular protection of the same broad range of high-risk patients. Surprisingly, despite a more pronounced blood pressure lowering, the combination of the two agents did not lead to an additional decrease in the number of events, but had significantly more side-effects compared to ramipril monotherapy. ONTARGET is a landmark study, performed according to the highest statistical and clinical standards, providing compelling evidence and clear answers to two important clinical questions.

[Drug related problems pharmacists encounter when a patient is discharged from hospital]. / Problématique des médicaments à prendre par les patients sortant de l'hôpital: etude réalisée auprès de pharmaciens d'officine flamands.

AIMS: To explore drug related problems a community pharmacist encounters when a patient is discharged from hospital. The study also investigates which information from the hospital reaches the community pharmacy. METHODS: A validated survey was presented, by community pharmacists, to patients or their family after hospital discharge, between the 1st of December 2007 and the 29th of February 2008. The survey contained questions on 4 items: patient characteristics--discharge medication--information received from the hospital--drug related problems and pharmacists interventions. Analyses were done with SPSS 16.0. MAIN RESULTS: 82 community pharmacists participated. 261 patients were included. Only 25% of the patients collected their medication from the pharmacy themselves. On discharge, patients on average received two additional drugs, compared to the pre-hospital situation. 69% received a medication chart, but less than half of them brought this chart along when visiting the pharmacy. Only 9% got computer-generated prescriptions from the hospital and < 3% received a letter of referral addressed to their pharmacist. In 33% of the cases the pharmacists noticed one or more problems concerning the medication prescribed after hospital discharge. The chance to detect a problem increased significantly when the chart was brought to the pharmacy (p=0.033). In case of observed problems, the community pharmacist succeeded to reach the treating specialist by phone in less than one third of those cases. CONCLUSION: The results foster the discussion on the need for a better seamless care and the role clinical and community pharmacists could play in this care model.

Nebivolol versus enalapril in essential hypertension: a long-term double-blind comparative trial.

Nebivolol was compared in a dose of 5 mg once daily with enalapril 10 mg once daily over 7 months in a double-blind randomised trial in essential hypertension. The two drugs had very similar sustained effects in lowering both systolic and diastolic pressures; neither had an orthostatic component. Both drugs were well-tolerated. No haematological, biochemical, or urinary abnormalities were seen.

Physiological red blood cell kinetic model to explain the apparent discrepancy between adenosine breakdown inhibition and nucleoside transporter occupancy of draflazine.

A physiological red blood cell (RBC) kinetic model is proposed for the adenosine (ADO) transport into erythrocytes and its subsequent intracellular deamination into inactive inosine (INO) and further breakdown into hypoxanthine (HYPO). The model and its parameters were based on previous studies investigating the kinetics of the biochemical mechanism of uptake and metabolism of ADO in human erythrocytes. Application of the model for simulations of the breakdown of ADO in a RBC suspension revealed that the predicted adenosine breakdown inhibition (ABI) of draflazine corresponded well with the ABI measured ex vivo. The model definitely explained the apparent discrepancy between the ex vivo measured ABI and the nucleoside transporter occupancy of draflazine. Intracellular deamination of ADO rather than its transport by the nucleoside transporter is the rate-limiting step in the overall catabolism of ADO. Consequently, at least 90% occupancy of the transporter by draflazine is required to inhibit adenosine breakdown ex vivo substantially. Simulations on basis of the validated model were performed to evaluate the ABI for different experimental conditions and to mimic the clinical situation. The latter may be very helpful for the design of optimal dosing schemes of draflazine. It was demonstrated that the short half-life of released ADO was prolonged substantially in a dose-related manner after a continuous infusion of draflazine. Finally, the previously found different sigmoidal Emax relationships between the measured ABI and the concentrations of draflazine in plasma and whole blood could be explained by the ADO transport and breakdown RBC kinetic model and the capacity-limited specific RBC binding characteristics of draflazine.

Nebivolol versus nifedipine in the treatment of essential hypertension: a double-blind, randomized, comparative trial.

The efficacy and acceptability of 5 mg nebivolol once daily, a long-acting, vasodilating cardioselective beta blocker that additionally facilitates the L-arginine/nitric oxide system, was assessed in a double-blind, randomized trial in comparison with 20 mg nifedipine retard twice daily in patients with essential hypertension. At 2 weeks of treatment, nebivolol was significantly more effective. Thereafter, both drugs effectively and similarly lowered systolic and diastolic pressures without orthostatic effect. Nebivolol had a trough-to-peak antihypertensive effect ratio of 90%. Nifedipine gave the expected side effects of headache, flushing, and edema. Nebivolol was well tolerated. Nebivolol slightly but significantly lowered heart rate. Neither drug adversely affected plasma levels of lipids.