Clinical pharmacists' interventions for preventing adverse events in critically ill neonates in Qatar: an economic impact analysis.

Objective: This study aimed to assess the overall economic impact of clinical pharmacist interventions in the neonatal ICU (NICU) in Qatar. Methods: A retrospective review of neonates' records was performed over a 3-month duration in the NICU of Qatar to determine the total economic benefit of clinical pharmacist interventions. The total benefit of interventions was calculated by considering the cost avoidance due to preventable adverse drug events (ADEs) and the cost savings associated with the revised resource use due to interventions. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to ensure the robustness and generalizability of the results. Results: A total of 513 interventions were analyzed, involving 150 neonates. Most of the drug-related problems were related to therapy dosing, followed by drug choice appropriateness, the addition of prophylactic treatment, and administration frequency. The overall annual benefit was estimated at QAR 4,178,352 (1,147,584), which consisted of cost avoidance of QAR 1,050,680 (USD 288,648) and an overall cost saving of QAR -6091 (USD -1673). Conclusions: While the clinical pharmacist interventions led to increased resource utilisation and associated costs, when considering the avoided costs of ADEs, the overall clinical pharmacist practices in the NICU setting were economically beneficial.

Clinical and Economic Evaluation of the Impact of Midazolam on Morphine Therapy for Pain Relief in Critically Ill Ventilated Infants with Respiratory Distress Syndrome.

BACKGROUND: The impact of midazolam on the overall performance of morphine therapy for pain in ventilated neonates with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) has never been investigated. OBJECTIVE: This study is a clinical and economic analysis of morphine monotherapy versus morphine plus midazolam in ventilated infants with RDS. METHODS: A decision-analytic model from the hospital perspective was developed to follow the consequences of the use of the study drugs. Clinical and resource utilization data were extracted based on a retrospective cohort study of 104 neonates with RDS receiving morphine alone versus in combination with midazolam at the main neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) in Qatar, from 2014 to 2019. Primary outcome measures were the analgesia success rate, via the Premature Infant Pain Profile scale, and overall costs of therapies. Multivariate statistical analyses confirmed no significant variations in baseline characteristics between study groups. RESULTS: With 0.05 significance and 80% power, morphine had a higher rate of successful analgesia (65.4 vs. 34.6%; risk ratio 1.91; 95% confidence interval 1.11-3.28; p = 0.019). Overall costs were also in favor of morphine compared with its combination with midazolam, with cost savings of 40,959 Qatari Riyal ($US11,222), year 2019/20 values. The Monte Carlo analyses confirmed the economic advantage of morphine alone in 100% of cases and demonstrated that it is not sensitive to uncertainties in study model inputs. CONCLUSIONS: Morphine monotherapy enabled enhanced pain relief over its combination with midazolam in the NICU, at a reduced overall cost. Morphine alone, therefore, seems to be a dominant analgesia strategy.

Clinical and Economic Analysis of Morphine Versus Fentanyl in Managing Ventilated Neonates With Respiratory Distress Syndrome in the Intensive Care Setting.

PURPOSE: Morphine and fentanyl opioids are common analgesic agents for consideration in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) for neonates with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and undergoing mechanical ventilation (MV). The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of morphine versus fentanyl in neonates with RDS undergoing MV. METHODS: Retrospective cost-effectiveness analysis of critically ill neonates with RDS receiving standard doses of morphine versus fentanyl at Women's Wellness and Research Center, Qatar. Clinical data of neonates were extracted from medical records of patients from 2014 to 2016. A decision analytic model based on the hospital's perspective was constructed to follow possible consequences of the initial dosing of analgesia, before potential titration. Primary end points were successful pain relief rate based on the Premature Infant Pain Profile scale and overall direct medical cost of therapy. Study population of 126 neonates was used to achieve results with 80% power and 0.05 significance. Sensitivity analysis was conducted to enhance robustness of conclusions against input uncertainties and to increase generalizability of results. FINDINGS: Morphine achieved a success of 68% versus 43% with fentanyl (risk ratio = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.16-2.56; P = 0.0075). Morphine was associated with a minimal incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of USD 135 per additional case of successful pain relief over fentanyl. Higher morphine cost was reported in 2% of cases. Sensitivity analysis found model insensitivity to input uncertainties except NICU stay and cost of MV. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first cost-effectiveness evaluation of morphine versus fentanyl in the NICU. Morphine significantly improved the relieve of pain over fentanyl. It had 98% probability of dominance over fentanyl. Results in this study support the use of morphine over fentanyl as first-line monotherapy with MV in NICU settings.

Evaluations of Morphine and Fentanyl for Mechanically Ventilated Patients With Respiratory Disorders in Intensive Care: A Systematic Review of Methodological Trends and Reporting Quality.

BACKGROUND: Mechanically ventilated patients with respiratory disorders may require sedatives, such as opioids. OBJECTIVES: To define methodological trends, gaps, and the reporting quality of the comparative clinical and economic evaluations of fentanyl and morphine in ventilated patients in the intensive care unit. METHODS: We conducted a literature review of the MEDLINE, Embase, OVID, ScienceDirect, Springer Link, and EconLit databases, comparing studies in the management of ventilated patients with respiratory disorders in the intensive care unit using either fentanyl or morphine, or both. We assessed the methodological aspects of the literature characteristics and trends of, for example, modeling, data sources, cost calculation, and data analysis, appraising the quality of reporting via the CONsolidated Standards Of Reporting Trials, STrengthening the Reporting of OBservational studies in Epidemiology, and the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards checklists. RESULTS: Among 1327 articles, 33 (comprising 22 in adults, 8 in neonates, and 3 in pediatrics) met the inclusion criteria. No head-to-head morphine versus fentanyl evaluations explicitly confined to subjects with respiratory conditions were undertaken. Studies relied on various scales to measure the sedation level as a primary study outcome, limiting the comparability of study conclusions. Seven articles of adults were identified to be economic studies from the hospital perspective. On the basis of different endpoints, the same sedation regimen performed differently in various studies. None of the randomized controlled trials, observational cohorts, or pharmacoeconomics studies met most of the assessed reporting quality criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Our review identified poor reporting quality and high heterogeneity of methods used, potentially limiting the degree to which studies could be interpreted, decisions could be influenced, and findings could be generalized.