Pdf

Author(s)

DEL RIO GUTIERREZ JOSE MANUEL, MARTA MIARONS FONT, SONIA GARCIA GARCIA, TONI SORIANO COLOMÉ, ALBA PAU PARRA, ARIADNA GRACIA MOYA, NIEVES HERRANZ MUÑOZ, BRUNO MONTORO RONSANO, PAU RELLO SABATE, GERARD ORISTRELL SANTAMARIA, MARIA QUERALT GORGAS TORNER

Why was it done?

Digoxin is a drug frequently implicated in medication errors due to its difficult clinical management. It has also been observed that digoxin pharmacokinetics could change in acute medical conditions, compromising its effectiveness and safety. As hospital pharmacists, we have the opportunity to review which dose is the most appropriate for every patient.

What was done?

Twice-weekly active and extensive pharmaceutical review of digoxin-treated inpatients was established to identify whether the prescription was adequate and to adjust dosage according to plasma concentrations (PCs) and clinical situation.

How was it done?

1. A multidisciplinary team comprising pharmacists and cardiologists was created to identify possible solutions to improve digoxin prescribing.
2. It was agreed that a twice-weekly extensive review of digoxin-treated inpatients would be conducted by a pharmacist. Candidates for digoxin monitoring were:
a. Patients on chronic digoxin therapy and with at least one of the following risk factors: presence of renal failure (RF), recent surgery, elderly patients (≥65 years), critically ill patients, or patients with suspected toxicity.
3. Once the patients were identified by the pharmacist, they would be discussed with the cardiology team.
4. Digoxin prescriber would be contacted to recommend performing a determination of digoxin PC. PC reference range was set at 0.8–1.2 µg/L for atrial fibrillation (AF) and 0.5–0.8 µg/L for heart failure (HF).
5. PCs would be interpreted using a pharmacokinetic monitoring software (PKS Abbot).
6. Monitoring results and recommended dosage adjustments would be communicated.

What has been achieved?

From August 2021 to May 2022, 190 patients were identified. Sixty-five (33.7%) were considered for monitoring, of whom 21 (32.3%) were women. The average age was 77.9 (SD 11.7). Sixty-five (100%) with AF and 8 (12.3%) also with HF. The most prevalent risk factors warranting monitoring were patients aged 65 years or older (N=57, 61.9%) and RF (N=31, 33.7%). Thirty-three (51%) of monitored patients required a dosage adjustment, of whom 23 (69.8%) required a dose decrease, 5 (15.1%) an increase and 5 (15.1%) to stop the treatment. Median digoxin concentrations were 1.23 µg/L (interquartile range: 0.75-2.03).

What next?

The process described applies to any centre able to monitor digoxin CPs both in inpatient and outpatient settings.

Pdf

Author(s)

Peder Nygard, Helle-Brit Fiebrich-Westra, Elise Smolders

Why was it done?

The aim of this project was to reduce paclitaxel waste caused by cancellation of administrations. Standardised dose bands make interchangeability of already reconstituted paclitaxel bags easier, as more patients use the same dose. This could potentially save drug- and material waste and costs even as manpower.

What was done?

Paclitaxel fixed dose bands were created for patients treated with a weekly dose of 80 mg/m2.

How was it done?

In consultation with prescribers the dose bands for paclitaxel where created (see table). These dosages were implemented as a dose-rounding rules in the drug preparation software (Hix 6.2, ChipSoft BV). The maximum deviation for dose-rounding rules for paclitaxel in our hospital is 10% of the prescribed dose. Dosage ≤72mg or >200mg were rounded as normal.

Prescribed dose (mg) Dose-band (mg) m2 (dose 80 mg/m2
>72 ≤88 78 1.0
>88 ≤102 96 1.2
>102 ≤116 114 1.4
>116 ≤136 126 1.6
>136 ≤152 144 1.8
>152 ≤168 162 2.0
>168 ≤184 174 2.2
>184 ≤200 192 2.4

What has been achieved?

These rules were implemented in April 2022. Data from 1 May 2022 to 31 August 2022 is compared with the same time period in 2021. In 2022, a total of 729 infusions where prepared compared with 872 infusions in 2021.
In this 4 month time period in 2022 a total of 14 different dosages were prescribed, compared with 24 in the same time period in 2021. Additionally, interchangeability was improved as the top 3 dosages prepared by the pharmacy were: 144 mg (36%), 162 mg (22%), and 126 mg (19%) compared with 144 mg (17%), 138 mg (14%), and 126 mg (10%) in 2021.
Furthermore, in 2021 we discarded 33 prepared dosages of paclitaxel of which three infusions could be reused. Compared to 13 discarded dosages in 2022 of which eight were reused giving a reduction of 25 infusions less waste (83% reduction, savings ~2500 euros).

What next?

Pharmacists need to be instructed to adapt these rounding rules, which must decrease the variation in dosages and thus waste. Secondly, this project will be monitored the upcoming year and evaluated together with prescribers. The aim is to implement dose bands for paclitaxel dosages 175 mg/m2 and other chemotherapeutic drugs (eg, oxaliplatin, docetaxel, cyclophosphamide).

Pdf

Author(s)

Nóra Gyimesi, Andrea Bor, Eszter Erika Nagy, András Süle

Why was it done?

Evidence suggests that the rate of bacterial co-infection among COVID-19-infected patients is low. However, routine use of antibiotics was common in the early stages of the treatment.

What was done?

Clinical pharmacist participated in the therapeutic decision making of COVID-19 patients treated in our institution in order to ensure the optimal choice of medicines with special regard to the use of antibiotics.

How was it done?

A daily therapeutic discussion was started in the quarantine department from 2021, with the participation of clinical pharmacists, during which all therapy initiation were consulted. The pharmacist was involved in the walk-arounds and reviewed the medication therapies of each patient daily. The clinical pharmacist advised on the starting, or, if it was considered unnecessary, the stopping of the antibiotic therapies, as well as the monitoring required. The choice and dosage of antibiotics were also consulted.

What has been achieved?

Of the 314 patients treated in the Quarantine Department of our institution between September 2020 and May 2021 104 (33%) received antibiotic therapy during treatment, with 73% of cases initiated within 72 hours of admission. In 68 cases, bacterial superinfection was the indication for antibiotic therapy, of which only 9 cases had radiologist-confirmed bacterial co-infection. The rate of antibiotic usage has decreased after the intervention was started. During the second wave of the coronavirus epidemic (until February 2021), 41% of patients received antibiotics, while during the third wave (from March 2021), 28% of patients.

What next?

The pharmacist involvment, along with increasing experience and evidence for the clinical management of COVID-19, have moderated antibiotic use, however antibiotic overuse is still significant. Our Department of Pharmacy developed a local COVID-19 treatment guideline with emphasis on antibiotic use requirements. The education and promotion of this guideline will be undertaken by clinical pharmacists. Multidisciplinary therapeutic decision-making and strengthening of antibiotic stewardship programs are necessary for proper antibiotic use practices in the treatment of coronavirus patients.

Author(s)

CLARA NOTARIO DONGIL, ALEJANDRO MARCOS DE LA TORRE, MARÍA CARMEN CONDE GARCÍA, MARÍA MAR ALAÑÓN PARDO, BEATRIZ PROY VEGA, NATALIA ANDRÉS NAVARRO

Why was it done?

Most of the cultures performed in outpatients were not reviewed or were reviewed too late. An early detection for an adequate control of multidrug-resistant bacteria and the setting of a targeted antibiotic treatment, in case of being necessary, was the aim of this project. Hence basis for the implementation of an ASP is laid down, giving also advice to medical staff regarding appropriate antibiotic treatments.

What was done?

Multiresistant bacteria containment is a public health priority. Antibiotic Stewardship Programs (ASPs) can help to enhance patient outcomes by improving antibiotic prescribing. ASPs are common in hospitals, but are not usually available in primary care.

How was it done?

1- A circuit between microbiology laboratory staff, preventive medicine and pharmacy service was done. The first two collaborated by presenting data from lab results.
2- Cultures of multidrug-resistant species of outpatients were included. Results were interpreted by a hospital pharmacist on a daily basis.
3- A circuit of telephone calls between pharmacy and primary care was settled in order to communicate high epidemiological impact species detected. Pharmacist collaborates by giving advice regarding the right drug, right dose and right time, only when antibiotic treatment was necessary. Reports were registered on the medical history.
4- Variables collected in database were: age, sex, institutionalized, antibiotics received, kidney disease, culture type, specie.

What has been achieved?

During five months, 52 patients were included (52% male, 48% female). Mean age: 68 years. 11% institutionalized patients. 31% presented kidney disease.
Urine culture (58%),skin culture (13%), bronchial/sputum culture (12%), stool culture (12%), , and other cultures (5%) were analysed. Multidrug-resistant species (spp) were: Klebsiella spp (34%); Pseudomonas spp (8%); Mycobacterium spp (6%); other spp (52%).
17 pharmacist interventions were carried out, all of them related to appropriated treatment. 2 patients were hospitalized in order to receive parenteral antibiotic.

What next?

Optimizing antibiotics use is important to effectively treat infections. Identifying species that generate therapeutic difficulties is essential. Pharmacist advice could reduce treatment failures applying efforts to improve antibiotic use, being link of union between hospital and primary care. Other activities such as providing training to medical staff or spread results regarding to the use of antibiotics will be critical for ASP development.

Author(s)

Andrea Costa-Navarro, Emilio Monte-Boquet, Mª Jesus Cuellar-Monreal, Ana Garcia-Robles, Eduardo Guerrero-Hurtado, Alejandra Ferrada-Gasco, Octavio Ballesta-Lopez, Andres Cruz-Sanchez, Jose Luis Poveda-Andres

Why was it done?

Complex medication regimens (MR) are associated with worse treatment adherence. The Medication Regimen Complexity Index (MRCI) is a validated tool used to quantify complexity of MR and it is the sum of the score in three sections: Dosage forms (A), dosing frequency (B) and additional directions (C).

What was done?

To assess the relative MR complexity among solid organ transplant patients (SOT; kidney, heart, lung and liver) in a tertiary hospital through the validated MRCI Spanish version.

How was it done?

Transplant patients who collected medication in the Hospital Pharmacy between January and March 2021 were selected. A total amount of 40 patients (ten per transplant) were chosen randomly through Excel®, and a macro with a template of MCRI was created. The qualitative variables were age, sex and type of transplant; the quantitative ones were months from transplant, total amount of medications, sections A, B, C and total MRCI. All prescribed medications documented in medical records at the hospital ambulatory clinics and the electronic medication list were included. Patients were excluded if they were followed-up in other hospitals, were exitus or MR dosage or frequency was missed/unclear. Subgroup analyses was made to assess MRCI among type of transplants through ANOVA. All data analysis were made with SPSS® version 23, with a <0,05 significance level and a confidence interval of 95%.

What has been achieved?

Sample median age was 56,6±14,7 years (95%CI:51,9-61,3), a 40%(16/40) were women, median of time from trasplant was 92,7±69,9 months (95%CI:70,4-115,0) and number of medications 11,1±4,6 (95%CI:9,6-12,6). Subgroup median MCRI were 23,3±10,2 (kidney; [95%CI:16,0-30,5]), 46,2±12,8 (lung; [95%CI:37,1-55,3]), 28,5±11,1 (heart; [95%CI:20,6-36,4]) and 18,7±5,4 (liver; [95%CI:14,8-22,5]). Section B was the most contributor to MCRI (16,6±8,2 [95%CI:14,0-19,2]), followed by C (6,6±4,3 [95%CI:5,2-7,9]) and A (5,7±3,7 [95%CI:4,5-6,9]). Tukey test showed a statistically significant MCRI in lung transplant with p<0,001 when compared to kidney and liver transplants, and p=0,002 compared to heart transplant.

What next?

Medication regiment of our sample was more complex in lung patients than in any other SOT, therefore these patients could benefit more pharmaceutical interventions. Further studies with bigger samples are required to confirm differences among kidney, liver and heart transplants.

Author(s)

Marta García-Queiruga, Begoña Feal-Cortizas, José María Gutiérrez-Urbón, Andrea Luaces-Rodríguez, Alejandro Martínez-Pradeda, Sandra Rotea-Salvo, Carla Fernandez-Oliveira, Víctor Giménez-Arufe, Luis Margusino-Framiñán, Isabel Martín-Herranz

Why was it done?

Daptomycin is an intravenous antibiotic usually prepared in Hospital Pharmacy services. Normally it is dosed based on body weight, which requires each intravenous mixture to be prepared in an individual manner for each patient. This might lead to an increased assistance workload in elaboration areas, a higher number of errors in the preparation and high costs due to waste materials generated during preparation.

What was done?

The aim of this study is to describe the preparation of intravenous daptomycin by dose banding, a system in which daptomycin doses are rounded up or down in order to standardize and protocolize the preparation of intravenous mixtures as much as possible.

How was it done?

In order to improve this situation, dose banding strategy was implemented in February 2019: the obtained final dose was rounded in such a way that only mixtures of 500, 700 and 850 mg were prepared (in agreement with Hospital Pharmacy and Infectious and Microbiology medical teams) , following this scheme:
PRESCRIBED DOSE PREPARED DOSE
< 400 mg Prescribed dose (individualized) 400–599 mg 500 mg ≥600–799 mg 700 mg ≥800 mg 850 mg

What has been achieved?

Previous year before starting dose banding strategy (2018), 5493 individualized doses of daptomycin were prepared for 437 patients in our Pharmacy service. Between June 2020 and June 2021, 2680, 2555 and 997 units of daptomycin 500, 700 and 850 mg, respectively, were prepared for 360 patients. Batches of standardized doses were prepared in advance and kept refrigerated (stability of 10 days in 100 ml of physiological saline) until dispensation. In addition, during the same period, 15 patients (4 from pediatrics) received 209 individualized doses (3.2% of the total doses) due to their low body weight.

What next?

This strategy might decrease the number of errors in preparation and reduce processing times, which is essential since early appropriate antibiotic treatment in severe infection has been associated with better outcomes. Dose banding model could be extrapolated to other drugs with good physical, medical and microbiological stability in dilution, which are frequently prescribed and when few dose bands can cover most of the prescriptions.

Author(s)

Carmen Ortí Juan, Cristina Toro Blanch, Maria Àngels Gispert Ametller, Ana Perez Plasencia, Cristina Lecha Ochoa, Anna Dordà Benito, Rosa Sacrest Güell

Why was it done?

Prescribing errors (PE) are an important cause of medication-related adverse events in the Emergency Departments (ED) but limited data are available in ED with electronic prescribing and administration (ePA) systems. Knowing the frequency and types of PE can help healthcare professionals to prevent and reduce the risk of them occurring.

What was done?

To determine the rate of PE in the ED, to classify incident types and to identify critical points where measures should be implemented to improve patient safety.

How was it done?

Prospective, observational and cross-sectional study in an ED with ePA system during 6 working days (May-June 2021). The inclusion criteria were patients stayed more than 8 hours in the ED and all patients awaiting hospitalization. Prescriptions were analyzed by a multidisciplinary team made up of two pharmacists, an emergency physician and the person in charge of the hospital’s medication errors committee. PE were reported to the hospital’s patient safety-related incident notification system.

What has been achieved?

Of the 65 prescriptions revised during the study period, PE were reported in 84 cases and 15 situations with the capacity to cause errors were detected. The average age of patients was 67 ± (SD=17,9) years and each prescription had an average of 8.4 medications. The rate of PE was 1.52 errors per patient, being higher in less severe patients than monitored patients (1.09 vs 2.0 PE per patient, respectively). The most common types of EP were omission of the usual medication (60.7%), wrong dose (15.5%), wrong frequency (7.1%) and drug is not indicated (7.1%). No adverse reactions related to EP were detected. According to the Spanish consensus about Medication Reconciliation in Emergency Units, 47.1% of omissions of usual medication were drugs that should be reconciled during the first 4 hours in the ED. The results of the study and the importance of medication reconciliation are highlighted in a session in the ED.

What next?

The PE rate in the ED was 1.52 per patient and the main type was omission of the usual medication. A cross sectional study will be made in the future and compared to the current one to establish the impact of the implemented measures on the PE rate.

Author(s)

Sonja Guntschnig

Why was it done?

The aim of this good practice initiative (GPI) was to identify local resistance patterns, improve prescribing quality, reduce hospital costs, calculate antibiotic use data, track problem organisms, infection clusters and enable transfer chains tracing.

What was done?

With the introduction of a new antimicrobial stewardship (AMS) group into Tauernklinikum, Zell am See, a new informatics tool called HyBase® by epiNet AG was implemented to establish an interface linking microbiological results, consumption of antimicrobials, the hospital infections surveillance system “Krankenhaus-Infektions-Surveillance-System”(KISS) and the hospitals antimicrobial resistance data. AMS teams need suitable AMS surveillance systems to track intervention changes and measure results.

How was it done?

After purchasing release by the hospital management, HyBase needed an interface with several IT system providers, namely the internal microbiology laboratory (KISS software), System Application and Product in processing (SAP), and two external microbiology laboratories.

What has been achieved?

Antibiotic consumption figures were obtained retrospectively by calculating defined daily doses (DDD). This also gave insight into problematic use of certain antibiotics and indicated potential for antibiotic restriction.
Antimicrobial resistance patterns were displayed, which led to the introduction of infection control and AMS measures. Alert organism surveillance data was obtained and evaluated for different wards.

What next?

Learning from this implementation will enable changes in antimicrobial prescribing which will lead to improvements, both in healthcare quality and patient safety as well as a potential reduction in prescribing costs. Alert organism clusters will be detectable as will be transfer chains in the healthcare setting. It will also allow for the introduction of infection control agent stewardship for example by testing hand disinfection compliance or recording the spread of surface adherent organisms.
This GPI addresses the WHO antimicrobial resistance global action plan and local antimicrobial medicines concerns. It may prove useful for other healthcare settings and can be easily implemented to obtain data necessary for robust effective antimicrobial stewardship.

Author(s)

Monira Alwhaibi

Why was it done?

This study is the first project of the STOP ME projects which aims to develop a tool that can assess the application of the essential strategies that can stop or minimize MEs in healthcare institutes in Saudi Arabia. Consequently, stakeholders in the healthcare system can identify current gaps that need feature improvement to enhance patient safety

What was done?

Medication Errors (ME) are defined as unintentional drug-induced harm that led to morbidity and mortality. The STOP (ME) project is a comprehensive series of research studies that aim to explore MEs in Saudi Arabia and how to stop such harmful events.

How was it done?

Extensive search of the literature review for the essential strategies to stop or minimize MEs was carried by the research team to develop a draft of the aimed tool. The survey tool was sent in round 1 to the Delphi experts’ panel for review. Based on received recommendations, the tool was updated and sent for round 2 review and consensus. The developed tool was then piloted to test the practicability of the tool before running the survey on large sample size (second project). The study was approved by the King Saud University Medical Centre IRB ethics committee [20/0153/IRB].

What has been achieved?

After using the Delphi technique two major changes happened to the survey. 1) Section A was removed (high alert medications). 2) A new section was added (ISMP publications) with some minor changes. Launching a pilot survey on thirty healthcare practitioners (physicians n=11, pharmacists n=10, nurses n=9) resulted in further minor changes by adding two new columns. The final tool was a survey consists of six sections including Demographics, Prescription, Dispensing, Administration, Monitoring and Quality, and Targeted Medication Safety Best Practices for Hospitals. All combined 86 questions with the determined time to answer the survey is in the range of 25-30 minutes. Overall feedback of the pilot survey was good.

What next?

This initiative “STOP ME” will have a significant impact in the field of medication safety research and will build awareness among institutes in Saudi Arabia that are lacking important strategies that prevent MEs

Author(s)

Catarina Oliveira, Ana Mirco, Fátima Falcão

Why was it done?

-lactams have proven to be effective and safe antibiotics over their history, and as a consequence, these drugs are typically among the most frequently prescribed in hospital settings. Optimization of treatment with β-lactams can be achieved by their administration by continuous infusion. Furthermore, this approach leads to a reduction of the nursing time devoted to preparation and administration. However, information regarding continuous infusion of β-lactams is not readily available for most antibiotics, leading to doubts about dosing, renal adjustments and administration, particularly uncertainties related to dilution of the antibiotics as most patients benefit from fluid restriction. Also, it was indispensable to understand which antibiotics had stability to be administered through continuous infusion.

What was done?

A protocol for continuous infusion of β-lactams was established in a coronary care unit (CCU), replacing the previous method of intermittent dosing in most patients.

How was it done?

Firstly, we evaluated which antibiotics benefited from this approach and had, simultaneously, stability. The antibiotics selected were Cefotaxime, Ceftazidime, Cefepime, Cefuroxime, Piperacillin/tazobactam, Penicillin G, Ampicillin and Flucloxacillin. In order to stablish a protocol for continuous infusion of these antibiotics, an extensive literature review was performed. Information about loading and maintenance dose, reconstitution, dilution (solvent and maximum concentration), infusion rate, renal adjustments, stability and storage was collected and summarized in a table.

What has been achieved?

A ready-to-use version of the β-lactams continuous infusion protocol was developed. In addition, dosing adjustments in patients on continuous renal replacement therapy, commonly made in patients in the CCU, were included too. This protocol was made available to all health professionals through the hospital’s intranet as well as posted in the CCU in order to be easily accessible by doctors and nurses. Thus, continuous infusion is now the standard for most patients requiring therapy with β-lactams in the CCU.

What next?

The implementation of this protocol has an education purpose, allowing the best use of documented practices in prescribing, medication review and administration continuous infusion of β-lactams. This protocol can similarly be easily implemented in other medical units. In the near future, we plan to monitor the compliance to the protocol and consider further improvements if necessary.