The Risk of Acute Kidney Injury in Critically Ill Patients Receiving Concomitant Vancomycin With Piperacillin-Tazobactam or Cefepime.

PURPOSE: The objective of this study was to compare the incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) among critically ill patients receiving combination therapy with vancomycin plus piperacillin-tazobactam (VPT) against patients receiving vancomycin plus cefepime (VC). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to an intensive care unit between September 2012 and December 2016 was conducted. Patients were included if they received combination therapy with VPT or VC for ≥48 hours. Patients were excluded if creatinine clearance was <60 mL/min or received renal replacement therapy prior to the initiation of therapy. The primary end point was AKI, as defined by the Acute Kidney Injury Network classification, during or within 48 hours of completion of therapy. The incidence of AKI was compared between groups and multivariate analysis was performed to control for relevant confounders. RESULTS: A total of 394 patients received either VPT (n = 258) or VC (n = 136). There were no differences in baseline serum creatinine (0.8 [0.3]mg/dL vs 0.7 [0.3] mg/dL, P = 0.207), use of vasopressors (44% vs 38%, P = 0.255), mechanical ventilation (45% vs 40%, P = 0.350), or initial vancomycin trough (11.2 [5] mg/L vs 11 [4.8] mg/L, P = 0.668) between VPT and VC groups, respectively. The incidence of AKI was 28.7% for VPT patients versus 21.3% for VC patients (P = 0.114). Multivariate analysis revealed vancomycin trough >20 mg/L (odds ratio, OR [95% confidence interval, CI] = 2.69 [1.62-4.47]), baseline SCr (OR [95% CI] = 3.34 [1.43-7.80]), vasopressors (OR [95% CI] = 1.77 [1.04-3.04]), and duration of combination therapy (OR [95% CI] = 1.009 [1.003-1.015]) as independent risk factors for AKI. CONCLUSION: The risk of AKI was similar between VPT and VC groups in critically ill patients. Risk factors for AKI were related to baseline renal function, duration of combination therapy, supratherapeutic vancomycin troughs, and severity of illness.

Evaluation of the "medication fall risk score".

PURPOSE: Results of a study evaluating the predictive validity of a fall screening tool in hospitalized patients are reported. METHODS: Administrative claims data from two hospitals were analyzed to determine the discriminatory ability of the "medication fall risk score" (RxFS), a medication review fall-risk screening tool that is designed for use in conjunction with nurse-administered tools such as the Morse Fall Scale (MFS). Through analysis of data on administered medications and documented falls in a population of adults who underwent fall-risk screening at hospital admission over a 15-month period (n = 33,058), the predictive value of admission MFS scores, alone or in combination with retrospectively calculated RxFS-based risk scores, was assessed. Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis and net reclassification improvement (NRI) analysis were used to evaluate improvements in risk prediction with the addition of RxFS data to the prediction model. RESULTS: The area under the ROC curve for the predictive model for falls compromising both MFS and RxFS scores was computed as 0.8014, which was greater than the area under the ROC curve associated with use of the MFS alone (0.7823, p = 0.0030). Screening based on MFS scores alone had 81.25% sensitivity and 61.37% specificity. Combined use of RxFS and MFS scores resulted in 82.42% sensitivity and 66.65% specificity (NRI = 0.0587, p = 0.0003). CONCLUSION: Reclassification of fall risk based on coadministration of the MFS and the RxFS tools resulted in a modest improvement in specificity without compromising sensitivity.

Comparative analysis of empiric antimicrobial treatments for skin and soft tissue infections in newly hospitalized patients.

PURPOSE: Intravenous vancomycin is the standard empiric treatment for complicated skin and soft tissue infections (SSTIs) due to its coverage against methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA). The objective of this study was to compare the hospital length of stay (LOS) between vancomycin-treated patients and patients receiving newer anti-MRSA agents. The study also aimed to identify factors associated with therapy change in patients receiving vancomycin on admission. METHODS: Electronic medical records were used to conduct this retrospective cohort study. The LOS was compared among 5 groups of adult patients with admission diagnoses for SSTI who were initiated on linezolid, daptomycin, ceftaroline, tigecycline, or vancomycin. Survival analysis was used to identify factors associated with therapy change from vancomycin to another study medication. RESULTS: Vancomycin was prescribed in 1046 (92%) admissions. Although none of the between-group differences in LOS reached statistical significance, there was a trend toward shorter LOS in vancomycin-treated patients compared to linezolid-treated patients (P = .059). Coagulopathy was independently associated with increased likelihood of therapy change from vancomycin (hazard ratio = 4.71; P <.001). CONCLUSIONS: In the treatment of SSTI, newer agents result in LOS comparable to vancomycin. In patients initiated on vancomycin, therapy change was associated with longer LOS. Coagulopathy was independently associated with increased probability of therapy change.

Impact of cotherapy with some proton pump inhibitors on medical claims among HMO patients already using other common drugs also cleared by cytochrome P450.

Adverse drug event (ADE) rates resulting from coadministration of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and other drugs with potential for interaction with PPIs (DPIs) are unknown. This retrospective study assesses the occurrence of such ADEs and their potential impact on medical care costs by reviewing integrated medical and pharmacy claims. Managed care patients receiving one or more DPIs were identified. Within this sample, those who were also prescribed omeprazole or lansoprazole (DPI + PPI) were included. A second cohort (DPI alone) was created, matching for age, gender, and DPI use. Rates of ADEs were followed for 6 months after entry. Among PPI users, 58% used one or more DPIs, whereas 7% of DPI subjects used a PPI. Among claims arising from ADEs occurring in more than 1% of patients, 14 occurred in the DPI + PPI group and 2 occurred in the DPI-alone cohort, respectively, a highly significant difference. Crude odds ratios for the risks of specific ADEs were significantly increased for cotherapy with a PPI and warfarin, clarithromycin, corticosteroids, carbamazepine, nifedipine, or diclofenac. After adjustment, the first three associations remained significant. Coprescription of a PPI with potentially interacting drugs was common in practice and associated with significantly increased claims for medical care.