2
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Interventions of a clinical pharmacist in a medical intensive care unit – A retrospective analysis

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Several studies demonstrated a significant decrease in prescription errors, adverse drug events, treatment costs and improved patient outcomes, when a clinical pharmacist (CP) was a full member of a multidisciplinary team in the intensive care unit (ICU). Our aim was to evaluate the activities of a CP, included in a 12-bed medical ICU team of a university hospital in the course of several months. We conducted a retrospective analysis of all the CP’s interventions from March 2017 to November 2017, carried out and documented after reviewing and discussing patients’ medical data with the treating ICU physicians. We identified four main categories of CP’s interventions: pharmacotherapy adjustments to kidney function (PAKF category), drug-drug interactions (DDIs category), therapeutic monitoring of drugs with narrow therapeutic index (TDM category), and drug administration by the nasogastric tube (NGT category). During the study period, 533 patients were admitted to the medical ICU. The CP reviewed the medical data of 321 patients and suggested 307 interventions in 95 patients. There were 147 interventions of the PAKF category, 57 interventions of the TDM category, 30 interventions of the NGT category, and 22 interventions of the DDIs category. Fifty-one interventions were unspecified. The majority of all interventions (203/307) were related to antimicrobial drugs. ICU physicians completely accepted 80.2% of the CP’s suggestions. We observed that regular participation of the CP in the medical ICU team contributed to more individualized and improved pharmacological treatment of patients. Therefore, ICU teams should be encouraged to include CPs as regular team members.

          Related collections

          Most cited references33

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Critical care delivery in the intensive care unit: defining clinical roles and the best practice model.

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pharmacokinetic Drug Interaction Profiles of Proton Pump Inhibitors: An Update

            Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are used extensively for the treatment of gastric acid-related disorders, often over the long term, which raises the potential for clinically significant drug interactions in patients receiving concomitant medications. These drug–drug interactions have been previously reviewed. However, the current knowledge is likely to have advanced, so a thorough review of the literature published since 2006 was conducted. This identified new studies of drug interactions that are modulated by gastric pH. These studies showed the effect of a PPI-induced increase in intragastric pH on mycophenolate mofetil pharmacokinetics, which were characterised by a decrease in the maximum exposure and availability of mycophenolic acid, at least at early time points. Post-2006 data were also available outlining the altered pharmacokinetics of protease inhibitors with concomitant PPI exposure. New data for the more recently marketed dexlansoprazole suggest it has no impact on the pharmacokinetics of diazepam, phenytoin, theophylline and warfarin. The CYP2C19-mediated interaction that seems to exist between clopidogrel and omeprazole or esomeprazole has been shown to be clinically important in research published since the 2006 review; this effect is not seen as a class effect of PPIs. Finally, data suggest that coadministration of PPIs with methotrexate may affect methotrexate pharmacokinetics, although the mechanism of interaction is not well understood. As was shown in the previous review, individual PPIs differ in their propensities to interact with other drugs and the extent to which their interaction profiles have been defined. The interaction profiles of omeprazole and pantoprazole sodium (pantoprazole-Na) have been studied most extensively. Several studies have shown that omeprazole carries a considerable potential for drug interactions because of its high affinity for CYP2C19 and moderate affinity for CYP3A4. In contrast, pantoprazole-Na appears to have lower potential for interactions with other medications. Lansoprazole and rabeprazole also seem to have a weaker potential for interactions than omeprazole, although their interaction profiles, along with those of esomeprazole and dexlansoprazole, have been less extensively investigated. Only a few drug interactions involving PPIs are of clinical significance. Nonetheless, the potential for drug interactions should be considered when choosing a PPI to manage gastric acid-related disorders. This is particularly relevant for elderly patients taking multiple medications, or for those receiving a concomitant medication with a narrow therapeutic index.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              On-ward participation of a hospital pharmacist in a Dutch intensive care unit reduces prescribing errors and related patient harm: an intervention study

              Introduction Patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) are at high risk for prescribing errors and related adverse drug events (ADEs). An effective intervention to decrease this risk, based on studies conducted mainly in North America, is on-ward participation of a clinical pharmacist in an ICU team. As the Dutch Healthcare System is organized differently and the on-ward role of hospital pharmacists in Dutch ICU teams is not well established, we conducted an intervention study to investigate whether participation of a hospital pharmacist can also be an effective approach in reducing prescribing errors and related patient harm (preventable ADEs) in this specific setting. Methods A prospective study compared a baseline period with an intervention period. During the intervention period, an ICU hospital pharmacist reviewed medication orders for patients admitted to the ICU, noted issues related to prescribing, formulated recommendations and discussed those during patient review meetings with the attending ICU physicians. Prescribing issues were scored as prescribing errors when consensus was reached between the ICU hospital pharmacist and ICU physicians. Results During the 8.5-month study period, medication orders for 1,173 patients were reviewed. The ICU hospital pharmacist made a total of 659 recommendations. During the intervention period, the rate of consensus between the ICU hospital pharmacist and ICU physicians was 74%. The incidence of prescribing errors during the intervention period was significantly lower than during the baseline period: 62.5 per 1,000 monitored patient-days versus 190.5 per 1,000 monitored patient-days, respectively (P < 0.001). Preventable ADEs (patient harm, National Coordinating Council for Medication Error Reporting and Prevention severity categories E and F) were reduced from 4.0 per 1,000 monitored patient-days during the baseline period to 1.0 per 1,000 monitored patient-days during the intervention period (P = 0.25). Per monitored patient-day, the intervention itself cost €3, but might have saved €26 to €40 by preventing ADEs. Conclusions On-ward participation of a hospital pharmacist in a Dutch ICU was associated with significant reductions in prescribing errors and related patient harm (preventable ADEs) at acceptable costs per monitored patient-day. Trial registration number ISRCTN92487665
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Bosn J Basic Med Sci
                Bosn J Basic Med Sci
                Bosnian Journal of Basic Medical Sciences
                Association of Basic Medical Sciences of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosnia )
                1512-8601
                1840-4812
                November 2020
                : 20
                : 4
                : 495-501
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Central Pharmacy, University Medical Centre Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
                [2 ]Department of Medical Intensive Care, University Medical Centre Maribor, Maribor, Slovenia
                Author notes
                [* ] Corresponding author: Maja Cvikl, Central Pharmacy, University Medical Centre Maribor, Ljubljanska 5, Maribor 2000, Slovenia. E-mail: majacvikl85@ 123456gmail.com
                Article
                BJBMS-20-495
                10.17305/bjbms.2020.4612
                7664781
                32070269
                d1058f90-575a-4c78-9225-0460566e7af5
                Copyright: © The Author(s) (2020)

                This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

                History
                : 14 January 2020
                : 08 February 2020
                Categories
                Research Article

                clinical pharmacy,intensive care,interventions,medication errors,multidisciplinary care,slovenia

                Comments

                Comment on this article