Optimization of Nutrition And Medication (OptiNAM) for acutely admitted older patients: protocol for a randomized single-blinded controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, older patients (≥65 years) account for more than 40% of acute admissions. Older patients admitted to the emergency department (ED) are frequently malnourished and exposed to inappropriate medication prescribing, due in part to the inaccuracy of creatinine-based equations for estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). The overall aims of this trial are to investigate: (1) the efficacy of a medication review (MED intervention) independent of nutritional status, (2) the accuracy of eGFR equations based on various biomarkers compared to measured GFR (mGFR) based on 99mTechnetium-diethylenetriaminepentaacetic acid plasma clearance, and (3) the efficacy of an individualized multimodal and transitional nutritional intervention (MULTI-NUT-MED intervention) in older patients with or at risk of malnutrition in the ED. METHODS: The trial is a single-center block randomized, controlled, observer-blinded, superiority and explorative trial with two parallel groups. The population consists of 200 older patients admitted to the ED: 70 patients without malnutrition or risk of malnutrition and 130 patients with or at risk of malnutrition defined as a Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form score ≤11. All patients without the risk of malnutrition receive the MED intervention, which consists of a medication review by a pharmacist and geriatrician in the ED. Patients with or at risk of malnutrition receive the MULTI-NUT-MED intervention, which consists of the MED intervention in addition to, dietary counseling and individualized interventions based on the results of screening tests for dysphagia, problems with activities of daily living, low muscle strength in the lower extremities, depression, and problems with oral health. Baseline data are collected upon study inclusion, and follow-up data are collected at 8 and 16 weeks after discharge. The primary outcomes are (1) change in medication appropriateness index (MAI) score from baseline to 8 weeks after discharge, (2) accuracy of different eGFR equations compared to mGFR, and (3) change in health-related quality of life (measured with EuroQol-5D-5L) from baseline to 16 weeks after discharge. DISCUSSION: The trial will provide new information on strategies to optimize the treatment of malnutrition and inappropriate medication prescribing among older patients admitted to the ED. TRAIL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NTC03741283 . Retrospectively registered on 14 November 2018.

Risk of Malnutrition upon Admission and after Discharge in Acutely Admitted Older Medical Patients: A Prospective Observational Study.

There is a lack of knowledge about malnutrition and risk of malnutrition upon admission and after discharge in older medical patients. This study aimed to describe prevalence, risk factors, and screening tools for malnutrition in older medical patients. In a prospective observational study, malnutrition was evaluated in 128 older medical patients (≥65 years) using the Nutritional Risk Screening 2002 (NRS-2002), the Mini Nutritional Assessment-Short Form (MNA-SF) and the Eating Validation Scheme (EVS). The European Society of Clinical Nutrition (ESPEN) diagnostic criteria from 2015 were applied for diagnosis. Agreement between the screening tools was evaluated by kappa statistics. Risk factors for malnutrition included polypharmacy, dysphagia, depression, low functional capacity, eating-related problems and lowered cognitive function. Malnutrition or risk of malnutrition were prevalent at baseline (59-98%) and follow-up (30-88%). The baseline, follow-up and transitional agreements ranged from slight to moderate. NRS-2002 and MNA-SF yielded the highest agreement (kappa: 0.31 (95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.18-0.44) to 0.57 (95%CI 0.42-0.72)). Prevalence of risk factors ranged from 17-68%. Applying ESPEN 2015 diagnostic criteria, 15% had malnutrition at baseline and 13% at follow-up. In conclusion, malnutrition, risk of malnutrition and risk factors hereof are prevalent in older medical patients. MNA-SF and NRS-2002 showed the highest agreement at baseline, follow-up, and transitionally.

A Collaborative Deprescribing Intervention in a Subacute Medical Outpatient Clinic: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

Medication deprescribing is essential to prevent inappropriate medication use in multimorbid patients. However, experience of deprescribing in Danish Subacute Medical Outpatient Clinics (SMOCs) is limited. The objective of our pilot study was to evaluate the feasibility and sustainability of a collaborative deprescribing intervention by a pharmacist and a physician to multimorbid patients in a SMOC. A randomized controlled pilot study was conducted, with phone follow-up at 30 and 365+ days. A senior pharmacist performed a systematic deprescribing intervention using the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, the Danish deprescribing list, and patient interviews. A senior physician received the proposed recommendations and decided which should be implemented. The main outcome was the number of patients having ≥1 medication where deprescribing status was sustained 30 days after inclusion. Out of 76 eligible patients, 72 (95%) were included and 67 (93%) completed the study (57% male; mean age 73 years; mean number of 10 prescribed medications). Nineteen patients (56%) in the intervention group and four (12%) in the control group had ≥1 medication where deprescribing status was sustained 30 days after inclusion (p = 0.015). In total, 37 medications were deprescribed in the intervention group and five in the control group. At 365+ days after inclusion, 97% and 100% of the deprescribed medications were sustained in the intervention and control groups, respectively. The three most frequently deprescribed medication groups were analgesics, cardiovascular, and gastrointestinal medications. In conclusion, a collaborative deprescribing intervention for multimorbid patients was feasible and resulted in sustainable deprescribing of medication in a SMOC.

Dysphagia Prevalence, Time Course, and Association with Probable Sarcopenia, Inactivity, Malnutrition, and Disease Status in Older Patients Admitted to an Emergency Department: A Secondary Analysis of Cohort Study Data.

There is evolving evidence for an association between dysphagia and sarcopenia in older adults. For optimizing the acute health care initiative across health care settings, this study investigated prevalence and time-course of dysphagia in older patients admitted to an emergency department (ED) as well as its association with parameters for probable sarcopenia, inactivity, malnutrition, disease status, and systemic inflammation. A secondary analysis of data from the FAM-CPH cohort study on acutely admitted older medical patients (n = 125). Data were collected upon ED admission as well as four and 56 weeks after discharge. Using the Eating Assessment Tool cut-off score ≥ 2, signs of dysphagia were present in 34% of the patients at ED admission and persisted in 25% of the patients 56 weeks after discharge. Signs of dysphagia at 56-week follow-up were significantly (p < 0.05) associated with probable sarcopenia (low handgrip strength (OR = 3.79), low leg muscle strength (OR = 8.14), and low physical performance (OR = 5.68)) and with baseline swallowing inactivity (OR = 5.61), malnutrition (OR = 4.35), and systemic inflammation (OR = 1.33). Signs of dysphagia in older patients admitted to an ED was prevalent, persisted 56 weeks after discharge, and was associated with probable sarcopenia and related conditions; all modifiable targets for management of dysphagia in older patients.

A Collaborative Medication Review Including Deprescribing for Older Patients in an Emergency Department: A Longitudinal Feasibility Study.

Medication review for older patients with polypharmacy in the emergency department (ED) is crucial to prevent inappropriate prescribing. Our objective was to assess the feasibility of a collaborative medication review in older medical patients (≥65 years) using polypharmacy (≥5 long-term medications). A pharmacist performed the medication review using the tools: Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP) criteria, a drug-drug interaction database (SFINX), and Renbase® (renal dosing database). A geriatrician received the medication review and decided which recommendations should be implemented. The outcomes were: differences in Medication Appropriateness Index (MAI) and Assessment of Underutilization Index (AOU) scores between admission and 30 days after discharge and the percentage of patients for which the intervention was completed before discharge. Sixty patients were included from the ED, the intervention was completed before discharge for 50 patients (83%), and 39 (61.5% male; median age 80 years) completed the follow-up 30 days after discharge. The median MAI score decreased from 14 (IQR 8-20) at admission to 8 (IQR 2-13) 30 days after discharge (p < 0.001). The number of patients with an AOU score ≥1 was reduced from 36% to 10% (p < 0.001). Thirty days after discharge, 83% of the changes were sustained and for 28 patients (72%), 1≥ medication had been deprescribed. In conclusion, a collaborative medication review and deprescribing intervention is feasible to perform in the ED.

Translation and psychometric validation of a Danish version of the medication-related quality of life scale.

Background Generic and disease specific health-related quality of life scales have been found to be non-responsive to changes in medications in polypharmacy patients. The Taiwanese medication-related quality of life (MRQoL) scale aims to measure the effect of medication use on patients' quality of life. Objective To evaluate the psychometric properties of the Danish translation of MRQoL in a population of patients with polypharmacy. Setting Polypharmacy patients waiting for services at a community pharmacy or hospital in Denmark. Method The original MRQoL included 14 items. It was forward-translated into Danish and backward-translated into Chinese according to a modified translation protocol proposed by Sousa and Rojjanasrirrat et al. The translation was pre-tested, adjusted, and administered to polypharmacy patients. The factor structure was examined using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA). Internal consistency reliability was evaluated, and criterion validity assessed using the beliefs about medicines questionnaire (BMQ) and SF-12v2. Known-group validity was carried out on age, number of medicines and setting. Main outcome measure Validity of the Danish version of the MRQoL-scale. Results 164 patients completed the questionnaire. EFA of all 14 items resulted in a two-factor structure, accounting for 72.8% of the total variance. The two factors were named "Energy/Concentration" (7 items) and "Feelings/Social" (7 items). Items correlating over 0.80 were removed leaving 11 items (Model 1). This model was further reduced to 8 items (Model 2) based on Cronbach's alpha. CFA confirmed the two-factor structure of both models. Model 2 fitted data without having to define covariations between error terms. Both factors showed high internal consistency reliability (Cronbachs' alpha 0.901-0.932). Ceiling effects were detected for both factors. Criterion validity was demonstrated via its significant correlations with SF-12vs2 subscales (Spearman's rho 0.340-0.353) and BMQ Concern (Spearman's rho - 0.451 to - 0.347). There was a statistically significant difference in relation to total scores of the MRQoL for age and number of drugs taken, indicating known-group validity. Conclusion The Danish translation of the MRQoL instrument showed measurement properties indicating a well-defined two-factor structure with high internal reliability, concurrent criterion validity, and known group validity. However, challenges remain with ceiling effects and efforts should be put into further development of the instrument.

Characterization of burning mouth syndrome profiles based on response to a local anaesthetic lozenge.

OBJECTIVE: Burning mouth syndrome (BMS) is a chronic oral pain condition with unknown aetiology but assumed to involve peripheral/central neuropathological and immune-mediated inflammatory factors. We aimed at characterizing inflammatory and neurogenic profiles and oral symptomatology of patients with BMS based on response to a local anaesthetic lozenge. METHODS: Patients with BMS were divided into an Effect (n = 13), No effect (n = 8) or Unspecified (n = 2) group according to their response to a local anaesthetic lozenge on oral pain. Inflammation was assessed in blood plasma and saliva by analyses of IL-6, IL-8, IL-17A, IL-23 and TNF-α levels. The degree of inflammation and distribution of oestrogen receptor, NGF, NGF-receptor, TRPV-1 and IL-17F in buccal mucosal tissue were investigated by immunohistochemistry. RESULTS: Immunoreactivity to the oestrogen receptor was most intense in the Effect group, whereas the No effect group tended to have higher plasma levels of the pro-inflammatory cytokines. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings indicate that the response to treatment with local anaesthesia enables subgrouping of patients with BMS according to the potential pathogenic mechanisms. Effect of local anaesthesia indicates a peripheral neuropathology involving lack of oestrogen and upregulation of oestrogen receptors, and no effect indicates a systemic inflammation-induced mechanism leading to increased levels of plasma cytokines.

Discrepancies Between the Medication List in Electronic Prescribing Systems and Patients' Actual Use of Medicines.

Discrepancies between electronic prescribing systems and patients' actual use of medicines can result in adverse events and medication errors and have serious consequences for the patients. The discrepancies can be identified when performing a thorough medication reconciliation. Computerized health care systems throughout the Danish health care sector are integrated with the Shared Medication Record (SMR). In the SMR, current medication and medication prescriptions are registered. The aim of this study was to evaluate the number and types of discrepancies between medications listed in the SMR and an updated medication list, obtained through a thorough medication reconciliation, for patients admitted in Danish hospitals. Pharmacists listed the number and type of discrepancies for 412 patients. A total of 1,004 discrepancies were registered, with a mean number of 2.4 medication discrepancies per patient. For 25% (n = 101) of the patients, no discrepancies were found, 20% (n = 86) had one discrepancy, and 16% (n = 66) had five or more discrepancies. More than 50% of the patients had one or more medications in the SMR that the patient did not administer, and 12.6% used medications that were not listed in the SMR. This shows that the SMR should not be used as the only source of information when recording medication history.

Differences in Kidney Function Estimates Based on Creatinine and/or Cystatin C in Non-Traumatic Amputation Patients and Their Impact on Drug Prescribing.

Accurate kidney function estimates are necessary when prescribing renally-eliminated medications. Our objectives were to investigate how amputation affects estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and to determine if dosing recommendations differ among different eGFR equations. In a cohort study of non-traumatic amputation patients, eGFR based on creatinine and/or cystatin C were measured before and after amputation. Prescribed, renally-eliminated medications were compared with dosing guidelines in Renbase®. Data from 38 patients with a median age of 75 years were analyzed. The median (range) eGFR was 65 (15⁻103), 38 (13⁻79), and 48 (13⁻86) mL/min/1.73 m² before amputation and 80 (22⁻107), 51 (13⁻95), and 62 (16⁻100) mL/min/1.73 m² after amputation for eGFRCreatinine, eGFRCystatinC, and eGFRCombined, respectively (p < 0.01). From before to after amputation, eGFR increased on average by 8.5, 6.1, and 7.4 mL/min/1.73 m² for eGFRCreatinine, eGFRCystatinC, and eGFRCombined (all p < 0.01), respectively. At least one renally-eliminated medication was prescribed at a higher dose than recommended in 37.8% of patients using eGFRCystatinC, 17.6% using eGFRCombined and 10.8% using eGFRCreatinine. In conclusion, amputation affects eGFR regardless of the eGFR equations. The differences among equations would impact prescribing of renally-eliminated medications, particularly when switching from creatinine to cystatin C.

Kidney function estimates using cystatin C versus creatinine: Impact on medication prescribing in acutely hospitalized elderly patients.

BACKGROUND: Medication errors due to inaccurate measures of kidney function are common among elderly patients. We investigated differences between estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) based on creatinine and cystatin C and how these differences would affect prescribing recommendations among acutely hospitalized elderly patients. We also identified factors associated with discrepancies between estimates. METHODS: Estimated glomerular filtration rate and chronic kidney disease (CKD) classifications were determined for 338 acutely hospitalized elderly patients using equations from Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI), Berlin Initiative Study (BIS) and Cockcroft-Gault (CG). Prescribed renal risk medications were compared with dosing guidelines in Renbase® . Linear regression models were used to identify explanatory variables for eGFR discrepancies between equations. Muscle weakness was assessed by handgrip strength; inflammation was assessed by smoking status, serum C-reactive protein (CRP), soluble urokinase plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) and neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL); and organ dysfunction was assessed by thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) and FI-OutRef. RESULTS: Median eGFR values were 65.5, 60.7, 54.1, 57.1, 55.1 and 57.6 mL/min/1.73m2 according to CKD-EPICr , CKD-EPIComb , CKD-EPICys , BISCr , BISComb and CGCr , respectively. Depending on choice of equation, renal risk medications were prescribed at higher than recommended dose in 13.6% to 22.5% of patients using normalized GFR units and 9.9% to 19.1% of patients using absolute units. Age, handgrip strength, CRP, suPAR, NGAL and smoking status had significant association with eGFR discrepancies between creatinine- and cystatin C-based equations. CONCLUSIONS: Significant discrepancies in eGFR and CKD classification were observed when switching between eGFR equations in acutely hospitalized elderly patients. Switching from a creatinine-based equation to its corresponding cystatin C-based equation resulted in lower GFR estimates, and these differences were larger than in community-dwelling older populations. Switching between CKD-EPICr , CGCr and the alternative equations would result in clinically relevant changes to medication prescribing. Discrepancies between equations were associated with high age, muscle weakness and inflammation.

Creatinine-Based Renal Function Estimates and Dosage of Postoperative Pain Management for Elderly Acute Hip Fracture Patients.

Many analgesics and their metabolites are renally excreted. The widely used Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI)-estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equations are not developed for use in the elderly, while the recent Berlin Initiative Study (BIS), Full Age Spectrum (FAS), and Lund-Malmö revised (LMR) equations are. This observational study investigated differences between creatinine-based eGFR equations and how the choice of equation influences dosage of analgesics in elderly (≥70 years) patients admitted with acute hip fracture. eGFR was calculated by the CKD-EPI, BIS, Cockcroft-Gault (CG), FAS, LMR, and Modification of Diet in Renal Disease (MDRD) equations. Standard daily dose for postoperative pain medications ibuprofen, morphine and gabapentin was simulated for each equation according to dosage recommendations in Renbase®. For 118 patients, mean eGFR from the CKD-EPI, BIS, CG, FAS, LMR, and MDRD equations was 67.3 mL/min/1.73 m², 59.1 mL/min/1.73 m², 56.9 mL/min/1.73 m², 60.3 mL/min/1.73 m², 58.9 mL/min/1.73 m², and 79.1 mL/min/1.73 m², respectively (p < 0.0001). Mean difference to CKD-EPI was -10.4 mL/min/1.73 m² to 11.8 mL/min/1.73 m². Choice of eGFR equation significantly influenced the recommended dose (p < 0.0001). Shifting to BIS, FAS, or LMR equations led to a lower recommended dose in 20% to 31% of patients. Choice of eGFR equation significantly influenced dosing of ibuprofen, morphine, and gabapentin.

One-Stop Dispensing: Hospital Costs and Patient Perspectives on Self-Management of Medication.

(1) Objective: To assess hospital medication costs and staff time between One-Stop Dispensing (OSD) and the Traditional Medication System (TMS), and to evaluate patient perspectives on OSD. (2) Methods: The study was conducted at Hvidovre Hospital, University of Copenhagen, Denmark in an elective gastric surgery and acute orthopedic surgery department. This study consists of three sub-studies including adult patients able to self-manage medication. In Sub-study 1, staff time used to dispense and administer medication in TMS was assessed. Medication cost and OSD staff time were collected in Sub-study 2, while patient perspectives were assessed in Sub-study 3. Medication costs with two days of discharge medication were compared between measured OSD cost and simulated TMS cost for the same patients. Measured staff time in OSD was compared to simulated staff time in TMS for the same patients. Patient satisfaction related to OSD was evaluated by a questionnaire based on a five-point Likert scale ('very poor' (1) to 'very good' (5)). (3) Results: In total, 78 elective and 70 acute OSD patients were included. Overall, there was no significant difference between OSD and TMS in medication cost per patient ($2.03 [95% CI -0.57⁻4.63]) (p = 0.131). Compared with TMS, OSD significantly reduced staff time by an average of 12 min (p ≤ 0.001) per patient per hospitalization. The patients' satisfaction for OSD was high with an average score of 4.5 ± 0.7. (4) Conclusion: There were no differences in medication costs, but staff time was significantly lower in OSD and patients were overall satisfied with OSD.

Effect of bupivacaine lozenges on oral mucositis pain: a randomized controlled multicenter phase II study.

INTRODUCTION: A nonblinded parallel-group randomized controlled study investigated the efficacy and tolerability of repeated administration of a bupivacaine lozenge (25 mg) as pain management for oral mucositis pain in head and neck cancer patients as add-on to standard systemic pain management. OBJECTIVE: The primary end point was the difference between the intervention group (Lozenge group) and the Control group in daily mean pain scores in the oral cavity or pharynx (whichever was higher). METHOD: Fifty patients from 2 hospitals in Denmark were randomized 1:1 to 7 days of treatment with bupivacaine lozenges (taken up to every 2 hours) plus standard pain treatment minus topical lidocaine (Lozenge group) or standard pain treatment including topical lidocaine (Control group). The efficacy analysis included 38 patients, as 12 patients were excluded because of changes in study design and missing data. RESULTS: Mean pain in the oral cavity or pharynx (whichever was higher) was significantly lower 60 minutes after taking lozenges (35 mm [n = 22]) than for the Control group (51 mm [n = 16]) (difference between groups -16 mm, 95% confidence interval: -26 to -6, P = 0.0032). Pain in the oral cavity was also significantly lower in the Lozenge group (18 mm) vs the Control group (36 mm, P = 0.0002). Pharyngeal mucositis pain did not differ significantly (37 mm [Lozenge group] vs 48 mm [Control group], P = 0.0630). No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: These results show that the bupivacaine lozenge as an add-on to standard pain treatment had a clinically significant pain-relieving effect in patients with oral mucositis. CLINICALTRIALSGOV: NCT02252926.

Absorption of Bupivacaine after Administration of a Lozenge as Topical Treatment for Pain from Oral Mucositis.

The aim was to investigate systemic exposure after administration of a novel bupivacaine lozenge in healthy individuals with normal mucosa and in head and neck cancer (HNC) patients with oral mucositis. A lozenge containing 5, 10, 25 and 50 mg bupivacaine, respectively, was administered as single dose to 10 healthy individuals, and a lozenge containing 25 mg bupivacaine was administered as single dose to 10 HNC patients with oral mucositis and as multiple doses to five patients with HNC. Blood samples were collected for 6 hr from the healthy individuals and 3 hr from the patients with HNC, respectively, after administration. The plasma concentration-time profiles of bupivacaine were fitted to pharmacokinetic models using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling, evaluating demographics and health status as covariates. The population pharmacokinetics (PK) of bupivacaine lozenge was best described by a two-compartment distribution model with absorption transit compartments. All the observed plasma concentrations were well below the bupivacaine concentrations (2000-2250 ng/ml) which have caused toxic symptoms. The PK model suggested that relative bioavailability was two times higher in HNC patients with oral mucositis grade 1-2 and three times higher in HNC patients with oral mucositis grade 3-4 than in the healthy individuals. Simulations showed that the plasma concentrations would be below the toxic limit after repeated dosing every second hour with 25 mg bupivacaine for five days. The 25-mg bupivacaine lozenges were safe without systemic toxic levels of bupivacaine or risk of side effects. Based on PK simulations of repeated doses of 25 mg every two hours for 16 hr a day, the lozenges can be administered with minimum risk of exceeding the toxic limit.

A novel lozenge containing bupivacaine as topical alleviation of oral mucositis pain in patients with head and neck cancer: a pilot study.

Introduction: Oral mucositis induces severe oral pain in head and neck cancer patients. There is at this point no effective pain treatment without considerable side effects. Objective: The aim of this pilot study was to investigate pain reduction in oral cavity and pharynx in patients with head and neck cancer (HNC) with oral mucositis, the location of anesthetic effect, and duration of pain relief, after a single-dose administration of a 25 mg bupivacaine lozenge. Methods: Ten patients with HNC suffering from oral mucositis pain were included. The patients assessed pain in the oral cavity and pharynx on a visual analogue scale (from 0 to 100 mm) at baseline and up to 3 hours after the lozenge was dissolved. Possible adverse events were registered. Results: The baseline pain was 51 mm (range: 30-73 mm) in the oral cavity and 58 mm (range: 35-70 mm) in the pharynx. When the lozenge was dissolved, both oral (-27 mm; range: -3 to -52 mm; P = 0.0003) and pharynx pain (-20 mm; range: -3 to -45 mm; P = 0.008) were significantly reduced. After 180 minutes, the mean reduction in pain was significant in the oral cavity (-18 mm; range: -8 to -30 mm; P < 0.0001) but not in the pharynx (-8 mm; range: +4 to -23 mm; P = 0.12). No adverse events were observed. Conclusion: The results indicate that the bupivacaine lozenge has a clinically significant and long-lasting pain-relieving effect on pain because of oral mucositis in patients with HNC.

Bupivacaine Lozenge Compared with Lidocaine Spray as Topical Pharyngeal Anesthetic before Unsedated Upper Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Unsedated upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE) can induce patient discomfort, mainly due to a strong gag reflex. The aim was to assess the effect of a bupivacaine lozenge as topical pharyngeal anesthetic compared with standard treatment with a lidocaine spray before UGE. Ninety-nine adult outpatients undergoing unsedated diagnostic UGE were randomized to receive either a bupivacaine lozenge (L-group, n = 51) or lidocaine spray (S-group, n = 42). Primary objective was assessment of patient discomfort including acceptance of the gag reflex during UGE. The L-group assessed the discomfort significantly lower on a visual analog scale compared with the S-group (P = 0.02). There was also a significant difference in the four-point scale assessment of the gag reflex (P = 0.03). It was evaluated as acceptable by 49% in the L-group compared with 31% in the S-group. A bupivacaine lozenge compared with a lidocaine spray proved to be a superior option as topical pharyngeal anesthetic before an UGE.

New lidocaine lozenge as topical anesthesia compared to lidocaine viscous oral solution before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect and acceptance of a new lidocaine lozenge compared with a lidocaine viscous oral solution as a pharyngeal anesthetic before upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGE), a diagnostic procedure commonly performed worldwide during which many patients experience severe discomfort mostly because of the gag reflex. PARTICIPANTS: The single-blinded, randomized, controlled study involved 110 adult patients undergoing diagnostic UGE at the Department of Gastroenterology, Hvidovre University Hospital, Denmark. METHODS: The patients were randomized to receive either 100 mg lidocaine as a lozenge or 5 mL lidocaine viscous oral solution 2%. Intravenous midazolam was administered if needed. The effect of a lidocaine lozenge in reducing patient discomfort, including the gag reflex, during UGE compared with a lidocaine oral solution was assessed. RESULTS: Questionnaires from the patients showed that the gag reflex was acceptable for 64% in the lozenge group compared with 33% in the oral solution group (P = 0.0072). UGE was evaluated as acceptable by 69% in the lozenge group compared with 39% in the oral solution group (P = 0.0092). The taste was evaluated as good by 78% in the lozenge group (P < 0.0001), and 82% found the lozenge to have good texture (P < 0.0001). CONCLUSION: The lozenge reduced the gag reflex, diminished patients' discomfort during UGE, and was evaluated as having a good taste and texture. The lozenge improved patients' acceptance of UGE.