Early diuretic strategies and the association with In-hospital and Post-discharge outcomes in acute heart failure.

BACKGROUND: Decongestion is a primary goal during hospitalizations for decompensated heart failure (HF). However, data surrounding the preferred route and strategy of diuretic administration are limited with varying results in prior studies. METHODS: This is a retrospective analysis using patients from ASCEND-HF with a stable diuretic strategy in the first 24 hours following randomization. Patients were divided into three groups: intravenous (IV) continuous, IV bolus and oral strategy. Baseline characteristics, in-hospital outcomes, 30-day composite cardiovascular mortality or HF rehospitalization and 180-day all-cause mortality were compared across groups. Inverse propensity weighted modeling was used for adjustment. RESULTS: Among 5,738 patients with a stable diuretic regimen in the first 24 hours (80% of overall ASCEND trial), 3,944 (68.7%) patients received IV intermittent bolus administration of diuretics, 799 (13.9%) patients received IV continuous therapy and 995 (17.3%) patients with oral administration. Patients in the IV continuous group had a higher baseline creatinine (IV continuous 1.4 [1.1-1.7]; intermittent bolus 1.2 [1.0-1.6]; oral 1.2 [1.0-1.4] mg/dL; P <0.001) and high NTproBNP (IV continuous 5,216 [2,599-11,603]; intermittent bolus 4,944 [2,339-9,970]; oral 3,344 [1,570-7,077] pg/mL; P <0.001). There was no difference between IV continuous and intermittent bolus group in weight change, total urine output and change in renal function till 10 days/discharge (adjusted P >0.05 for all). There was no difference in 30 day mortality and HF readmission (adjusted OR 1.08 [95%CI: 0.74, 1.57]; P = 0.701) and 180 days mortality (adjusted OR 1.04 [95%CI: 0.75, 1.43]; P = 0.832). CONCLUSION: In a large cohort of patients with decompensated HF, there were no significant differences in diuretic-related in-hospital, or post-discharge outcomes between IV continuous and intermittent bolus administration. Tailoring appropriate diuretic strategy to different states of acute HF and congestion phenotypes needs to be further investigated.

Managing Chemotherapy Extravasation Across Transitions of Care: A Clinical Nurse Specialist Initiative.

Chemotherapy extravasation can lead to serious patient harm in patients with cancer. For nurses who administer vesicant chemotherapy, extravasation is a primary concern. Regardless of nurse experience level and despite prevention strategies, extravasations occur. Literature related to nurse management of chemotherapy extravasation beyond initial treatment is lacking, and no descriptors are available for a formalized process. Communication gaps and a lack of standardized follow-up within a 1400-bed, quaternary care academic medical institution contributes to challenges in care continuity when patients transition between hospital and ambulatory settings. With chemotherapy extravasation, the site does not immediately exhibit signs of tissue injury, leading to a false sense of security. As a result, tissue damage can be significant by the time the patient returns for his or her regular appointment. Two oncology clinical nurse specialists (CNSs) recognized an opportunity to bridge the gap and overcome the challenges by addressing patient needs postextravasation. Between 2015 and 2016, a formal consult process was designed, approved, and implemented to observe, manage, and make recommendations for timely care and follow-up. Since implementation of the process, the oncology CNSs have received multiple requests for consultations. Nursing staff report increased comfort levels with this process in place. A formalized process for managing chemotherapy extravasations increases patient safety and patient and nurse satisfaction.

The effects of ceftriaxone by intravenous push on adverse drug reactions in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: At our hospital, a shortage of sterile saline bags led to changing ceftriaxone from intravenous infusion to intravenous push. We examined if this change led to an increase in adverse reactions. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective chart analysis on patients 18 and older that were administered ceftriaxone in the ED between January to March 2018. Research assistants recorded information about possible adverse reactions. Adverse reactions were defined as any noxious or unintended response to a drug given at therapeutic doses. Potential adverse reactions were independently reviewed by three EM clinicians and confirmed by an adverse drug reaction probability scale. The primary outcome was the rate of adverse reactions for IVP administration of ceftriaxone. RESULTS: 831 encounters were identified, 77 were excluded due to erroneous or missing data, and a total of 753 were included. Study demographics include an average age of 52.8, a female majority (54.2%) and predominantly black patient population (41.5%). A total of 24 cases were potential adverse reactions. After independent review, only one of the 24 cases was determined to be an adverse reaction to ceftriaxone from IVP. The total adverse event rate observed was 1/753 or 0.13%. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that the rate of adverse reactions for IVP is lower than previously reported. Given the demonstrated safety of IVP administration, future studies are warranted to determine the implications for ED efficiency and cost benefits from this change in drug delivery.

Acute Myocardial Ischemia Following Bee Sting in an Adolescent Male: A Case Report.

BACKGROUND Epinephrine for anaphylactic shock is the standard life-saving treatment in the emergency department. Cardiac symptoms after epinephrine administration in a child with no prior cardiac history are often not suspected. We describe a presentation of diastolic cardiac dysfunction after anaphylaxis from a bee sting in an adolescent male. CASE REPORT A 16-year-old male with no prior history of allergy presented with anaphylaxis following a bee sting. The patient received an inadvertent intravenous rather than intramuscular dose of 1: 1000 epinephrine, leading to myocardial ischemia. Diastolic dysfunction resulting from myocardial ischemia and fluid resuscitation led to development of pulmonary edema. The patient required epinephrine drip for hemodynamic support and BiPAP for respiratory support. CONCLUSIONS This case highlights the risk of giving a rapid intravenous push of epinephrine, which converted an anaphylactic reaction to cardiogenic shock. Anaphylaxis-related coronary ischemia (Kounis) syndrome is another less likely etiology for our patient's presentation.

Dilution is no solution.

Some nurses continue to routinely dilute I.V. push medications, a practice associated with a high risk of errors. This article reviews correct practices for administering I.V. push medications.

Intravenous versus subcutaneous route pharmacokinetics of paracetamol (acetaminophen) in palliative care patients: study protocol for a randomized trial (ParaSCIVPallia).

BACKGROUND: Among palliative care (PC) patients who are administered paracetamol, the subcutaneous (SC) route is often an alternative to the intravenous (IV) route. Yet pharmacological and clinical data on whether these are equivalent pharmacokinetically are lacking. Many French palliative teams are now empirically using paracetamol by the SC route, but there are no data to support this practice. This trial aims to compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of paracetomol between the IV and SC routes in PC patients. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a randomized, open, crossover study in two PC centers. The primary endpoints are AUC0-t, AUC0-∞, Cmax, Vd, and t1/2. All adverse events will be reported for a safety analysis. Twenty adult PC patients with an IV device having spontaneous pain not related to care, with a numeric pain rate scale > 3/10, or having a systematic prescription of paracetamol as the usual treatment will be included. All patients also have to meet all eligibility criteria. CONCLUSION: This is the first study comparing PK parameters for IV paracetamol versus SC paracetamol in PC patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03944044. Registered on 4 June 2019. Committee for the protection of persons (CPP) 18.09.05.58206 approval 4 October 2018. National Drug Safety Agency (ANSM; Agence Nationale de Sécurité Médicament) MEDAECNAT-2018-09-00009 approval 29 November 2018.

Association of the incidence of venous air embolism on coronary computed tomography angiography with the intravenous access route preparation process.

Venous air embolism (VAE) can be observed in the right heart system on contrast-enhanced computed tomography (CT), following injection of contrast media with a power injector system. Although most VAEs are mostly asymptomatic, they may result in paradoxical air embolism (PAE).To evaluate whether the incidence of VAE on coronary CT angiography is associated with the process of preparation of the intravenous access route.We retrospectively evaluated 692 coronary CT examinations at 3 institutions. Trained CT nurses placed an intravenous cannula in the forearm. Tubes connected to the cannula were prepared in the following ways: A, using an interposed three-way cock and a 20-mL syringe filled with normal saline to collect air contamination in the tube; B, through direct connection to the power injector system without the interposed 3-way cock; and C, using an interposed three-way cock and a 100-mL normal saline drip infusion bottle system to keep the tube patent. The incidence and location of VAE and preparation of intravenous injection were assessed.The overall incidence of VAE was 55.3% (383/692), most frequently observed in the right atrium (81.5%, 312/383). Its incidence varied significantly across the 3 techniques (A: 21.6% (35/162), B: 63.2% (237/375) and C: 71.6% (111/155); P < .001). No patient demonstrated any symptom associated with VAE.Using a 3-way cock with syringe demonstrated the lowest incidence of VAE on coronary CT angiography. It is thus recommended to reduce potential complication risks related to intravenous contrast media injection.

Effect of bolus administration of non-ionic radiopaque contrast media on blood pressure variation.

INTRODUCTION: Haemodynamic changes may occur with the rapid intravenous injection of contrast media due to the osmolality of such pharmaceuticals. This study sought to evaluate the effect of bolus administration of intravenous contrast media on blood pressure variation during the Contrast-Enhanced Computed Tomography (CECT) of the abdomen. METHODS: The study included 74 patients who underwent abdominal CECT and they were placed in the first group receiving a maximum of 80 ml of iodinated contrast via pressure injector (4 ml/s). A further 74 patients, who underwent non-contrast enhanced abdominal CT, were placed in the second group in which 80 ml of normal saline was administered via the same manner. Patients with hypertension and who were on anti-hypertensive drugs were excluded from the study. Non-invasive blood pressure was monitored before the injection of contrast media/saline and immediately after the portal venous phase for the CECT scan and after 45 s following the administration of normal saline in the non-contrast CT group. Mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures from both groups were compared to find out the effect of contrast bolus administration on blood pressure variation. RESULTS: Both systolic and diastolic blood pressure increased with the injection of contrast media among CECT scan group. No significant changes in systolic and diastolic blood pressure were found before and after the scan in the non-contrast group. CONCLUSION: Bolus administration of 80 ml saline has no effect on blood pressure. The increased blood pressure in contrast enhanced studies was induced by the iodinated contrast media and not by the bolus effect.

A good "doctor" is hard to find: Assessing uncredentialed expertise in assisted injection.

This article examines how laypeople assess uncredentialed expertise in a high-risk practice: assisted injection, in which one person injects another with illicit drugs. In metropolitan areas in the US, about 2.3% of the population injects illicit drugs. Injection assistance is common and recipients of injection assistance are at high-risk for injury, overdose, and infection. Yet little is known about how injection recipients attempt to reduce these risks by assessing their injection provider's expertise. Drawing on ethnographic observations and interviews from 2015 to 2018 with 59 people who inject drugs in San Francisco, California, this article examines how people who need injection assistance assess injection provider expertise. It finds that people use an informal hierarchized decision-tree approach of three measures of trust to assess expertise: strong personal ties, referrals, or professional rhetoric. Using measures of trust to assess expertise minimizes some forms of risk by increasing the chance that injection providers are motivated to help them. However, this strategy offers little protection against technically unskilled providers. Moreover, it may increase health risks because people employ few self-protective strategies in trust-based relationships. This research offers new insights for theorization on expertise and trust in social contexts where high-risk skills are in demand. This approach also has implications for public health research and interventions for reducing risks related to lay medical practices, particularly those in assisted injection.

Improving the medication-use process for 23.4% sodium chloride.

PURPOSE: Results of a study to evaluate medication storage, distribution, and safety outcomes after addition of 23.4% sodium chloride to a hospital formulary and development of a novel distribution process incorporating safeguards allowing for urgent medication removal from an automated dispensing cabinet (ADC) are reported. SUMMARY: A retrospective review of 23.4% sodium chloride injection doses dispensed during a 38-month period was performed at an academic medical center to evaluate times from order entry to pharmacist verification, dispensing, and administration; adverse events related to dispensing or administration; and other outcomes. Seventy doses of 23.4% sodium chloride injection were administered to 60 patients during the study period. The mean times from order entry to pharmacist verification, medication removal from an ADC, and administration were 8, 25, and 43 minutes, respectively, when the ADC override function was not used. After 23.4% sodium chloride injection's addition to the ADC override list, 16 of 30 doses were removed "on override," with order entry performed retrospectively for 9 of these doses. There were no documented adverse events related to medication distribution and 2 adverse effects possibly related to medication administration. CONCLUSION: Novel storage and distribution processes for 23.4% sodium chloride injection were implemented at a large academic medical center to optimize safety related to the medication-use process. A retrospective review of 70 administered doses found the process of maintaining this medication in ADCs to be a safe and efficient method of storing and dispensing a high-alert medication.

Opioid agonist treatment dosage and patient-perceived dosage adequacy, and risk of hepatitis C infection among people who inject drugs.

BACKGROUND: Opioid agonist treatment is considered important in preventing acquisition of hepatitis C virus (HCV) among people who inject drugs; however, the role of dosage in opioid agonist treatment is unclear. We investigated the joint association of prescribed dosage of opioid agonist treatment and patient-perceived dosage adequacy with risk of HCV infection among people who inject drugs. METHODS: We followed prospectively people who inject drugs at risk of acquiring HCV infection (who were RNA negative and HCV-antibody negative or positive) in Montréal, Canada (2004-2017). At 6-month, then 3-month intervals, participants were tested for HCV antibodies or RNA, and completed an interviewer-administered behavioural questionnaire, reporting the following: current exposure to opioid agonist treatment (yes/no), prescribed dosage either high (methadone ≥ 60 mg/d or buprenorphine ≥ 16 mg/d) or low, and perceived dosage adequacy (adequate/inadequate). We then assigned participants to 1 of 5 exposure categories: no opioid agonist treatment, high dosage of opioid agonist treatment perceived to be adequate, high dosage perceived to be inadequate, low dosage perceived to be adequate or low dosage perceived to be inadequate. To estimate associations between categories of opioid agonist treatment dosage and incident HCV infection, we conducted Cox regression analyses, adjusting for multiple confounding factors. RESULTS: Of 513 participants (median age 35.0 yr, 77.6% male), 168 acquired HCV over 1422.6 person-years of follow-up (incidence 11.8/100 person-years, 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.1-13.7). We observed a gradient in the relative risks of HCV infection across categories of opioid agonist treatment dosage. Compared with people who inject drugs not receiving opioid agonist treatment, adjusted hazard ratios were 0.43 (95% CI 0.23-0.84) for those receiving high dosages perceived to be adequate, 0.61 (95% CI 0.25-1.50) for those receiving high dosages perceived to be inadequate, 1.22 (95% CI 0.74-2.00) for those receiving low dosages perceived to be adequate and 1.94 (95% CI 1.11-3.39) for those receiving low dosages perceived to be inadequate. INTERPRETATION: Risk of HCV infection varies considerably according to dosage of opioid agonist treatment and patient-perceived adequacy, with associations indicating both protective and harmful effects relative to no exposure to opioid agonist treatment.

Evaluation of iodine contrast-induced acute kidney injury via different injection routes using BOLD-MRI.

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the severity of acute kidney injury (AKI) induced by iodine contrast agent injection via the renal artery, ear vein, and femoral artery in a rabbit model. METHODS: Blood oxygenation level-dependent (BOLD) magnetic resonance (MR) scans were performed at 24 h prior to contrast injection and 1, 24, 48, and 72 h after injection. Iodixanol injection dose was 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 g iodine/kg, respectively. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1α (HIF-1α) expression was determined, and the BOLD-MRI parameter R2* was used to express tissue oxygenation. Increases in R2* levels reflect reductions in tissue oxygenation. Analyses including R2* value, dose response, histology, and HIF-1α were conducted. RESULT: Injection of 1.0 g iodine/kg into the left renal artery resulted in significant increases in renal R2* values after 24 h. This was equivalent to the change of R2* after 2.0 g iodine/kg femoral artery injection. Renal injury scores and HIF-1α expression scores were significantly increased at 24 h. The R2* values exhibited a positive linear correlation with histological injury scores. The maximum effects occurred 24 h after iodixanol injection and returned to baseline levels within 72 h. CONCLUSIONS: The renal injury induced by 1.0 g iodine/kg iodixanol through renal artery injection was more significant than that caused by the same dose of femoral artery and auricular vein injection, while similar to that caused by 2.0 g iodine/kg femoral artery injection.

Pain Sensitization, Breastfeeding Effectiveness, and Parental Preferences by Antibiotic Route in Suspected Neonatal Sepsis.

OBJECTIVES: Intravenous (IV) and intramuscular (IM) antibiotics have comparable efficacy in treating neonates undergoing sepsis evaluations. There are no clinical data favoring the use of either route regarding newborn pain and parental preferences. We hypothesized that pain associated with IM injections would worsen breastfeeding effectiveness and decrease parental satisfaction, making IV catheters the preferred route. METHODS: This prospective cohort study took place in an academic institution with nurseries in 2 separate hospitals, 1 providing IV antibiotics, and the other, IM antibiotics. Newborns receiving 48 hours of antibiotics were compared by using objective pain and breastfeeding scores and parental surveys. RESULTS: In 185 newborns studied, pain scores on a 7-point scale were up to 3.4 points higher in the IM compared with the IV group (P < .001). Slopes of repeated pain scores were 0.42 ± 0.08 and -0.01 ± 0.11 in the IM and IV groups, respectively (P = .002). Breastfeeding scores were similar between groups. Parents in the IV group were less likely to perceive discomfort with antibiotic administration (odds ratio [OR] 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.06-0.74) but more likely to perceive interference with breastfeeding (OR 26; 95% CI 6.4-108) and bonding (OR 101; 95% CI 17-590) and more likely to prefer changing to the alternate route (OR 6.9; 95% CI 2.3-20). CONCLUSIONS: IM antibiotics in newborns are associated with pain sensitization and greater pain than IV dosing. Despite accurately recognizing newborn pain with the IM route, parents preferred this to the IV route, which was perceived to interfere with breastfeeding and bonding.

The mask or the needle? Which induction should we go for?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review summarizes the current evidence available to guide anaesthetists along the decision-making process between inhalational and intravenous anaesthesia when caring for paediatric patients. RECENT FINDINGS: A recent large randomized controlled trial in children with risk factors demonstrated a significant benefit of intravenous induction over inhalational induction with regards to respiratory adverse events. This difference is particularly pronounced in those with respiratory symptoms. SUMMARY: For children scheduled for elective surgery, intravenous induction has significant advantages with regards to reduced respiratory adverse events and for less postoperative behavioural disturbances, it may be associated with more anxiety at the time of induction. The anaesthetist in charge of the patient needs to weigh up the balance between the clinical risk of respiratory adverse events, the 'veins on offer', the level of anxiety and previous experiences of the child and his/her parents.

Impact assessment of tail-vein injection in mice using a modified anaesthesia induction chamber versus a common restrainer without anaesthesia.

Intravenous (IV) administration in mice is predominantly performed via the lateral tail veins. The technique requires adequate training before it can be used safely and routinely. A novel anaesthesia induction chamber has been developed to simplify the treatment and to facilitate IV injection in mice, particularly for untrained personnel. We have assessed the benefits of the chamber in refining IV injection in isoflurane-anaesthetized mice in direct comparison with the common restrainer method on conscious animals. The body weight, nesting behaviour and concentrations of faecal corticosterone metabolites were taken as indicative of distress induced by the various procedures. The results suggest that both methods of tail-vein injection induce similar levels of momentary stress in the animals, revealed by a short-term increase in the levels of stress hormone metabolites in faeces. A temporary reduction of body weight was observed after IV injection under isoflurane anaesthesia but not for conscious mice injected in the common restrainer. We conclude that the severity of tail-vein injection in mice is 'mild' for both methods. There was no evidence that refining the procedure by using isoflurane anaesthesia in the induction chamber was associated with any benefit.

Systemic Dissemination of Injected Foreign Material.

A 32-year-old woman collapsed following an intravenous injection of material that included crushed pharmaceutical tablets. Resuscitation was attempted but was unsuccessful. She had an extensive past medical history of complications resulting from intravenous drug use. Death was due to mixed drug toxicity. The major findings at autopsy included a 10 mm deep skin sinus over the right femoral vein that was used as an injection site. Polarizable foreign material was present at the injection site and also within the lungs with a granulomatous reaction. Of note, a probe-patent foramen ovale had permitted paradoxical embolization of this material into the systemic circulation with lodgement within the liver, portal lymph nodes, myocardium, spleen, kidneys, and pancreas. This case highlights the importance of checking for any intracardiac shunts, which may be quite small, and systemic dissemination of foreign material to multiple organs in intravenous drug users who present for medicolegal assessment.