Evaluating Outcomes of a Pharmacist-Driven Pain Management Consult Service.

The opioid crisis continues to place a significant burden on American families and the healthcare system. To date, there is an evolving body of evidence demonstrating that pharmacists can positively impact patient care in the pain management specialty. The purpose of this study is to evaluate 24-hour average pain scores before and after a clinical pharmacist completes a physician-ordered pain consult in a community hospital setting. For the primary outcome, there was a statistically significant reduction in pain scores 48 hours post consult (6.5 vs. 5.2; p < 0.001; Table 3) and 24 hours prior to discharge (6.1 vs. 4.5; p < 0.001; Table 3) when compared to pain scores 24 hours prior to consult. Additionally, there was a statistically significant reduction in the number of morphine milligram equivalents (MMEs) at 48 hours post consult (149.4 vs. 133.8; p < 0.001; Table 4) and 24 hours prior to discharge (136.5 vs. 100.6; p < 0.001; Table 4) when compared to 24 hours prior to consult. This pharmacist-driven pain consult service demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in pain scores while simultaneously reducing MME utilization and the number of opioids ordered, using a multimodal evidence-driven approach to pain management in a community hospital.

Assessing febrile neutropenia outcomes in patients receiving primary versus secondary prophylactic G-CSF treatment therapy with intermediate neutropenic risk chemotherapy regimens.

BACKGROUND: Prophylaxis with granulocyte colony-stimulating factors (G-CSFs) reduce the severity and duration of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia. Currently, the use of G-CSF prophylactic treatment to prevent neutropenia and its complications varies widely in clinical practice with no standardization for intermediate-risk chemotherapy regimens. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to assess neutropenic outcomes in patients receiving intermediate-risk chemotherapy regimens who receive primary versus secondary prophylactic G-CSFs. METHODS: This is a retrospective, multicenter cohort study of patients who received intermediate risk chemotherapy regimens and at least one dose of G-CSF therapy. 121 patients were included and were divided into primary (n = 76) or secondary prophylaxis (n = 45) groups. The primary outcome for this study was the incidence of neutropenic episodes per course of treatment. The secondary outcomes included the percentage of patients who experienced delays in chemotherapy doses, the number of chemotherapy dose reductions, and the number of subsequent treatment delays. RESULTS: The incidence of neutropenic episodes over the course of therapy was 0.42 episodes in the primary group compared to 1.52 episodes in the secondary group (p < 0.05). 10.5% of patients in the primary group versus 54.3% of patients in the secondary group experienced chemotherapy dose delays (p < 0.05). There were no statistically significant differences in chemotherapy dose reductions or in the average number of FN risk factors between groups. CONCLUSION: This retrospective, cohort study determined that patients receiving intermediate risk chemotherapy regimens should receive primary prophylaxis, regardless of risk factors in order to decrease episodes of neutropenia and chemotherapy dose delays.

Comparison of Hemostatic Outcomes in Patients Receiving Fixed-Dose vs. Weight-Based 4-Factor Prothrombin Complex Concentrate.

BACKGROUND: Four-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) is a blood coagulation product indicated for urgent reversal of warfarin. Currently there are no studies using 4F-PCC as a fixed dose to achieve hemostasis with warfarin as well as direct factor Xa inhibitors. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of 4F-PCC administration using a fixed dose of approximately 2000 factor IX units to achieve hemostasis in anticoagulated patients, compared with weight-based therapy. METHODS: This single-center, retrospective cohort study was performed at a 433-bed tertiary care hospital in central Kentucky. Patients from January 1, 2014 to December 31, 2018 were included if they were 18 years or older and received 4F-PCC for hemostasis of oral anticoagulation. Efficacy was assessed by determining if clinically effective hemostasis was achieved after receiving a fixed-dose vs. a weight-based dose of 4F-PCC. RESULTS: Seventy-two patients were included in the study. Thirty-eight received weight-based dosing, compared with 34 receiving a fixed dose. Results yielded no statistical difference in clinically effective hemostasis using a fixed-dose vs. weight-based dosing, 91.2% and 78.9%, respectively (p = 0.150). There was no significant difference in adverse events, length of stay, or in-hospital mortality between groups; however, significant acquisition cost savings was realized. CONCLUSIONS: A fixed-dose regimen of approximately 2000 factor IX units of 4F-PCC may be a reasonable approach to achieve hemostasis in patients receiving warfarin or factor Xa inhibitors. Additionally, utilization of a fixed-dose regimen may lead to significant acquisition cost savings for facilities.

Intraosseous administration of 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate prior to emergent surgery after receiving apixaban.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: The 4-factor prothrombin complex concentrate (4F-PCC) may be used to emergently achieve haemostasis in patients on anticoagulation prior to surgery. Limited data exist using the intraosseous route of administration of 4F-PCC in patients taking factor Xa inhibitors. CASE DESCRIPTION: We describe a case of a 69-year-old female receiving oral apixaban that was successfully administered 4F-PCC using intraosseous access prior to emergent surgery to obtain haemostasis intraoperatively. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Intraosseous access may be a viable route of administration for 4F-PCC in patients receiving factor Xa inhibitors to achieve haemostasis when necessary.