Surge of Midazolam Use in the Midst of Lorazepam Shortage.

BACKGROUND: Lorazepam is a widely prescribed benzodiazepine that is used to manage anxiety, insomnia, and status epilepticus and is used for pre-anesthetic care as well as several off-label indications including aggression, alcohol withdrawal, panic disorder, chemotherapy-associated anticipatory nausea, and catatonia. Recent increases in demand, manufacturing changes, and quality control issues have resulted in a shortage of injectable and oral lorazepam, prompting clinicians to use alternatives. One such alternative is midazolam, a drug that has been used primarily in the intensive care unit and anesthesia settings. PROCEDURES: This article examines the significant pharmacologic differences between lorazepam and midazolam. In addition, this article provides dosage guidelines based on the current scientific knowledge and recommendations for conversion equivalencies. RESULTS: The clinical preference for lorazepam can be attributed to its simpler metabolism with no active metabolites, better suitability for patients with less severe hepatic and renal impairment, less risk of adverse reactions, fewer drug-drug interactions, and greater desirability for special populations. In periods of shortages, midazolam has been shown to be effective for a number of off-label uses. To manage conditions that have not been extensively studied, clinicians may opt to use conversion equivalencies, with the caveat that guidelines may vary greatly between institutions and online sources; therefore, it would be best to start low and titrate slowly. CONCLUSIONS: Our goal is to aid clinicians in safely and effectively prescribing midazolam during the shortage of injectable lorazepam so that patients are provided the same effects and benefits.

How Long-Term Care Quality Measures Address Alzheimer's Disease and Related Dementias in European Countries.

OBJECTIVES: Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) are prevalent conditions in long-term care homes (LTCHs) with most LTCH residents living with ADRD in many countries. Despite the prevalence of ADRD in LTCHs, a recent examination of LTCH quality measurement programs in 4 countries revealed few LTCH quality measures addressed ADRD, most commonly as a risk adjuster. We sought to better understand how quality measurement programs address ADRD internationally. DESIGN: International comparative analysis. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We examined LTCH quality measures in 4 European countries-Germany, Switzerland, Belgium, and the Netherlands. METHODS: The specifications to calculate each measure were assessed to determine whether the measure was calculated without assessing for ADRD, included only residents with ADRD, excluded residents with ADRD, or was risk adjusted for the presence of ADRD among the LTCH residents. RESULTS: A total of 143 measures were examined across 4 quality measurement programs. Thirty-seven percent of the measures explicitly address ADRD. The programs addressed ADRD in starkly different ways. In Germany, most (13 of 15) measures addressed ADRD, and did so as an exclusion or inclusion criterion, and in Switzerland all the measures addressed ADRD through risk adjustment. In Flanders, Belgium, all measures were calculated without assessing for ADRD. In the Netherlands, one-third of the measures explicitly addressed ADRD by restricting the measure to psychogeriatric units. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Although limited to examining measures from LTCH quality measurement programs in 4 European countries, this study adds evidence that ADRD tends not to be addressed by LTCH quality measures, but when ADRD is addressed, it tends to be through inclusion or exclusion criteria. LTCH regulators, policymakers, and providers can use this information to assess options for addressing ADRD in quality measurement programs. Future research is needed to assess how standard indicators of ADRD care quality differ across quality measurement programs.