Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Am Pharm Assoc (2003) ; 59(3): 336-342, 2019.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30948239

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Clinical pharmacists use population health methods to generate chronic disease management referrals for patients with uncontrolled chronic conditions. The purpose of this study was to compare primary care providers' (PCPs) referral responses for 4 pharmacist-managed indications and to identify provider and patient characteristics that are predictive of PCP response. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: This study occurred in an academic internal medicine clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Clinical pharmacy referrals generated through a population health approach between 2012 and 2016 for hypertension, chronic pain, depression, and benzodiazepine management were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Proportion of referrals accepted, left pending, or rejected and influencing provider and patient characteristics. RESULTS: Of 1769 referrals generated, PCPs accepted 869 (49%), left pending 300 (17%), and rejected 600 (34%). Compared with referrals for hypertension, benzodiazepine management, and depression, chronic pain referrals had the lowest likelihood of rejection (odds ratio [OR] 0.31; 95% CI 0.19-0.49). Depression referrals had an equal likelihood of being accepted or rejected (OR 1.04; 95% CI 0.66-1.64). Provider characteristics were not significantly associated with referral response, but residents were more likely to accept referrals. Patient characteristics associated with lower referral rejection included black race (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.18-0.87), higher systolic blood pressure (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.97-0.99), and missed visits (OR 0.24; 95% CI 0.07-0.81). CONCLUSION: The majority of referrals for clinical pharmacists in primary care settings were responded to, varying mostly between acceptance and rejection. There was variability in referral acceptance across indications, and some patient characteristics were associated with increased referral acceptance.


Assuntos
Farmacêuticos/organização & administração , Serviço de Farmácia Hospitalar/organização & administração , Serviço de Farmácia Hospitalar/tendências , Atenção Primária à Saúde/organização & administração , Encaminhamento e Consulta/organização & administração , Comportamento , Doença Crônica , Dor Crônica , Estudos de Coortes , Depressão , Pessoal de Saúde , Humanos , Hipertensão , Conduta do Tratamento Medicamentoso/tendências , Assistência Farmacêutica , Farmácias , Gestão da Saúde da População , Papel Profissional , Estudos Retrospectivos
2.
Ann Clin Microbiol Antimicrob ; 16(1): 60, 2017 Sep 11.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28893246

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) aims to minimize the clinical impact of posaconazole and voriconazole pharmacokinetic variability. However, its benefits on clinical outcomes are still being defined. Additionally, TDM data are limited for posaconazole IV and delayed-release tablet formulations among specific patient populations, including critically ill. The aim of this study was to determine the percentage of therapeutic posaconazole and voriconazole drug levels across all formulations in a real-world clinical setting and elucidate factors affecting attainment of target concentrations. METHODS: This study was a retrospective cohort study conducted at the University of Colorado Hospital between September 2006 and June 2015 that evaluated patients who received posaconazole or voriconazole TDM as part of routine care. RESULTS: Voriconazole (n = 250) and posaconazole (n = 100) levels were analyzed from 151 patients. Of these, 54% of voriconazole and 69% of posaconazole levels were therapeutic. For posaconazole, 14/38 (37%), 28/29 (97%) and 27/33 (82%) levels were therapeutic for the oral suspension, IV, and delayed-release tablet, respectively. Intravenous and delayed-release tablet posaconazole were 20 fold (p < 0.01) and sevenfold (p = 0.002) more likely than the oral suspension to achieve a therapeutic level. Subsequent levels were more likely to be therapeutic after dose adjustments (OR 3.31; 95% CI 1.3-8.6; p = 0.02), regardless of timing of initial non-therapeutic level. In a multivariable logistic regression analysis, no characteristics were independently predictive of therapeutic voriconazole levels and only absence of H2RA/PPI use was independently predictive of therapeutic posaconazole levels. There was no correlation between survival and therapeutic drug levels for either voriconazole (p = 0.67) or posaconazole (p = 0.50). CONCLUSIONS: A high percentage of drug levels did not achieve TDM targets for voriconazole and posaconazole oral suspension, supporting the need for routine TDM for those formulations. The utility of TDM for the IV and delayed-release tablet formulations of posaconazole is less apparent.


Assuntos
Monitoramento de Medicamentos/métodos , Triazóis/farmacocinética , Triazóis/uso terapêutico , Voriconazol/farmacocinética , Voriconazol/uso terapêutico , Administração Intravenosa , Administração Oral , Adulto , Antifúngicos/farmacocinética , Antifúngicos/uso terapêutico , Colorado , Composição de Medicamentos , Feminino , Humanos , Modelos Logísticos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Análise Multivariada , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Triazóis/efeitos adversos , Voriconazol/efeitos adversos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...