The Effect of Obesity on Anti-Xa Concentrations in Bariatric Patients.

BACKGROUND: Morbidly obese patients are at increased risk to develop venous thromboembolism (VTE), especially after bariatric surgery. Adequate postoperative thrombosis prophylaxis is of utmost importance. It is assumed that morbidly obese patients need higher doses of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) compared to normal-weight patients; however, current guidelines based on relative efficacy in obese populations are lacking. OBJECTIVES: First, we will evaluate the relationship between body weight descriptors and anti-Xa activity prospectively. Second, we will determine the dose-linearity of LMWH in morbidly obese patients. SETTING: This study was performed in a general hospital specialized in bariatric surgery. METHODS: Patients were scheduled for a Roux-en-Y gastric bypass with a total bodyweight (TBW) of ≥ 140 kg. Patients (n = 50, 64% female) received a daily postoperative dose of 5700 IU of nadroparin for 4 weeks. Anti-Xa activity was determined 4 h after the last nadroparin administration. To determine the dose linearity, anti-Xa was determined following a preoperative dose of 2850 IU nadroparin in another 50 patients (52%). RESULTS: TBW of the complete group was 148.5 ± 12.6 kg. Mean anti-Xa activity following 5700 IU nadroparin was 0.19 ± 0.07 IU/mL. Of all patients, 32% had anti-Xa levels below the prophylactic range. Anti-Xa activity inversely correlated with TBW (correlation coefficient - 0.410) and lean body weight (LBW; correlation coefficient - 0.447); 67% of patients with a LBW ≥ 80 kg had insufficient anti-Xa activity concentrations. No VTE events occurred. CONCLUSIONS: In morbidly obese patients, a postoperative dose of 5700 IU of nadroparin resulted in subprophylactic exposure in a significant proportion of patients. Especially in patients with LBW ≥ 80 kg, a higher dose may potentially be required to reach adequate prophylactic anti-Xa levels.

[It is all about the form - adrenaline in anaphylaxis: intravenous or intramuscular administration?] / Het gaat om de formulering, niet om de inhoud.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors are a frequent problem in the accident and emergency (A&E) department. CASE DESCRIPTION: A 17-year-old boy was referred to our A&E department with an anaphylactic reaction to peanuts. Because of various shortcomings in the care process in A&E, adrenaline was administered intravenously instead of intramuscularly, resulting in a broad complex tachycardia. We analysed these shortcomings using the 'Prevention and recovery information system for monitoring and analysis' (PRISMA) method. CONCLUSION: Medication errors are usually a result of shortcomings in non-technical skills, such as communication and situational awareness. Training these skills by applying the concept 'Crew resource management' may reduce medication errors and improve patient safety.

Nurse practitioners improve quality of care in chronic kidney disease: two-year results of a randomised study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is associated with increased cardiovascular risk. Here we evaluate whether strict implementation of guidelines aimed at multiple targets with the aid of nurse practitioners (NP) improves management in patients with CKD. METHODS: MASTER PLAN is a randomised controlled clinical trial, performed in nine Dutch hospitals. Patients with CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 20-70 ml÷min) were randomised to receive NP support (intervention group (IG)) or physician care (control group (CG)). Patients were followed for a median of five years. Presented data are an interim analysis on risk factor control at two-year follow-up. RESULTS: We included 788 patients (532 M, 256 F), (393 CG, 395 IG), mean (±SD ) age 59 (±13) years, eGFR 38 (±15) ml÷min÷1.73m(2), blood pressure (BP) 138 (±21)÷80 (±11) mmHg. At two years 698 patients (352 IG, 346 CG) could be analysed. IG as compared with CG had lower systolic (133 vs 135 mmHg; p= 0.04) and diastolic BP (77 vs 80 mmHg; p=0.007), LDL cholesterol (2.30 vs 2.45 mmol(-l); p= 0.03), and increased use of ACE inhibitors, statins, aspirin and vitamin D. The intervention had no effect on smoking cessation, body weight, physical activity or sodium excretion. CONCLUSION: In both groups, risk factor management improved. However, changes in BP control, lipid management and medication use were more pronounced in IG than in CG. Lifestyle interventions were not effective. Coaching by NPs thus benefits everyday care of CKD patients. Whether these changes translate into improvement in clinical endpoints remains to be established.

Hospital specific factors affect quality of blood pressure treatment in chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) is the most important modifiable risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease and progression of kidney dysfunction in patients with chronic kidney disease. Despite extensive antihypertensive treatment possibilities, adequate control is notoriously hard to achieve. Several determinants have been identified which affect BP control. In the current analysis we evaluated differences in achieved BP and achievement of the BP goal between hospitals and explored possible explanations. METHODS: At baseline, BP was measured in a supine position with an oscillometric device in 788 patients participating in the MASTER PLAN study. We also retrieved the last measured office BP from the patient records. Additional baseline characteristics were derived from the study database. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed with general linear modelling using hospital as a random factor. RESULTS: In univariate analysis, hospital was a determinant of the level of systolic and diastolic BP at baseline. Adjustment for patient, kidney disease, treatment or hospital characteristics affected the relation. Yet, in a fully adjusted model, differences between centres persisted with a range of 15 mmHg for systolic BP and 11 mmHg for diastolic BP. CONCLUSION: Despite extensive adjustments, a clinically relevant, statistically significant difference between hospitals was found in standardised BP measurements at baseline of a randomised controlled study. We hypothesise that differences in the approach towards BP control exist at the physician level and that these explain the differences between hospitals.