Search

The intranasal route for medication administration is increasingly popular in the emergency department and out-of-hospital setting because such administration is simple and fast, and can be used for patients without intravenous access and in situations in which obtaining an intravenous line is difficult or time intensive (eg, for patients who are seizing or combative). Several small studies (mostly pediatric) have shown midazolam to be effective for procedural sedation, anxiolysis, and seizures. Intranasal fentanyl demonstrates both safety and efficacy for the management of acute pain. The intranasal route appears to be an effective alternative for naloxone in opioid overdose. The literature is less clear on roles for intranasal ketamine and dexmedetomidine.

Purpose Nine recently published articles and one guideline with important implications for critical care pharmacy practice are summarized. Summary The Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update (CCPLU) group includes more than 40 experienced critical care pharmacists across the United States. Group members monitor 29 peer-reviewed journals on an ongoing basis to identify literature relevant to pharmacy practice in the critical care setting. After evaluation by CCPLU group members, selected articles are chosen for summarization and distribution to group members nationwide based on applicability to practice, relevance, and study design and strength. Hundreds of relevant articles were evaluated by the group in 2014, of which 114 were summarized and disseminated to CCPLU group members. From among those 114 publications, 10 deemed to be of particularly high utility to the critical care practitioner were selected for inclusion in this review for their potential to change practice or reinforce current evidence-based practice. One of the selected articles presents updated recommendations on the management of patients with atrial fibrillation (AF); the other 9 address topics such as albumin replacement in patients with severe sepsis, use of enteral statins for acute respiratory distress syndrome, fibrinolysis for patients with intermediate-risk pulmonary embolism, the use of unfractionated heparin versus bivalirudin for primary percutaneous coronary intervention, and early protocol-based care for septic shock. Conclusion There were many important additions to the critical care pharmacotherapy literature in 2014, including a joint guideline for the management of AF and reports of clinical trials.

Purpose Recent impactful additions to the professional literature on the role of pharmacotherapy in treating the critically ill are summarized. Summary An unusually large number of updated practice guidelines and other publications with broad critical care pharmacotherapy ramifications appeared in the primary biomedical literature during the designated review period (February 2012–February 2013). Hundreds of relevant articles were evaluated by the Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update group (CCPLU), a national group of pharmacists who routinely monitor 25 peer-reviewed journals for emerging evidence that pertains to rational medication use in the intensive care unit (ICU) setting. From among those articles, 64 were summarized for dissemination to CCPLU members; the 8 publications deemed to have the greatest utility for critical care practitioners, as determined by CCPLU through a voting process, were selected for inclusion in this review, with preference given to evidence meeting high standards of methodological quality. The summaries presented here include (1) important new recommendations on management of pain, agitation, and delirium in critically ill patients, (2) a comprehensive update of a practice guideline issued in 2008 by the Surviving Sepsis Campaign, (3) novel strategies for the prevention and/or treatment of hyperglycemia in critical care, and (4) reports on clinical trials of promising alternative methods of sedation for use in weaning patients from mechanical ventilation. Conclusion This review provides synopses of practice guidelines and other recent additions to the professional literature pertaining to rational medication use in the ICU practice setting.

Social media tools are increasingly figuring into the professional lives of health care professionals1–4 and are anticipated to be used increasingly as a vehicle for the communication of advances in medicine and continuing education.3 The most popular social media platforms (eg, Facebook, Pinterest, Twitter, Google+) allow the embedding of static images1 such as infographics. An infographic is any graphically rendered combination of text, pictures, and data visualizations in a manner that tells a complete story.2 Our study examined whether infographics might be used to communicate advances in medicine (eg, literature synopses).5 More specifically, the purpose of this study was to assess

Hepatic encephalopathy (HE) is caused by liver impairment and has a multitude of symptoms in affected patients, including change in level of consciousness, intellectual function, and neuromuscular function. Pharmacologic therapy includes use of nonabsorbable disaccharides (lactulose and lactitol), and antibiotics such as neomycin, paromycin, metronidazole, and rifaximin. Probiotics, acarbose, and drugs such as L-carnitine and flumazenil, may also be helpful in treating HE.

Purpose Ten recently published articles with important implications for critical care pharmacotherapy are summarized. Summary The Critical Care Pharmacotherapy Literature Update (CCPLU) group is a national assembly of experienced intensive care unit (ICU) pharmacists across the United States. Group members monitor 25 peer-reviewed journals on an ongoing basis to identify literature relevant to pharmacy practice in the critical care setting. After evaluation by CCPLU group members, selected articles are chosen for summarization and distribution to group members nationwide based on (1) applicability to critical care practice, (2) relevance to pharmacy practitioners, and (3) quality of evidence or research methodology. Hundreds of relevant articles were evaluated by the group during the period January–December 2013, of which 98 were summarized and disseminated nationally to CCPLU group members. Among those 98 publications, 10 deemed to be of particularly high utility to critical care practitioners were included in this review. The 10 articles address topics such as rapid lowering of blood pressure in patients with intracranial hemorrhage, adjunctive therapy to prevent renal injury due to acute heart failure, triple-drug therapy to improve neurologic outcomes after cardiac arrest, and continuous versus intermittent infusion of β-lactam antibiotics in severe sepsis. Conclusion There were many important additions to the critical care pharmacotherapy literature in 2013, including an updated guideline on the management of myocardial infarction and reports on advances in research focused on improving outcomes in patients with stroke or cardiac arrest and preventing the spread of drug-resistant pathogens in the ICU.

OBJECTIVE To compare calfactant (CA) and poractant alfa (PA) administration traits, short-term clinical responses, and resource use in the neonatal respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) setting. METHODS An open label series of 277 (213 PA and 64 CA) infants was evaluated for 445 administrations. Registered respiratory therapists collected patient, surfactant administration, and postadministration clinical data. Economic analysis involved labor costs of surfactant administration and usage, wastage, and product average wholesale price. Analysis utilized the Mann-Whitney rank sum test for differences in administration time and either the chi-square or Fisher's exact test for categorical variables. RESULTS PA had a statistically lower bedside administration time than CA (3.8 minutes vs. 5.3 minutes; P = .006) and a higher percentage of doses administered in less than five minutes (58.9% vs. 4.3%; P < .001). Doses administered per patient were similar (1.67 vs. 1.72). PA and CA were similar in time to recovery (81.4% vs. 74.3%), percent desaturation (24.8% vs. 26.7%), and bradycardia (3.8% vs. 8.5%). Reflux was significantly higher (13.2% vs. 3.5%; P < .001) with CA. Economic analyses found total administration costs per dose were $2.21 for PA and $3.08 for CA. Mean wastage costs were $141.21 for PA and $337.34 for CA (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS PA appeared to utilize fewer neonatal intensive care unit resources than CA due to reduced administration time and less wastage of drug product. Future studies should more closely evaluate time, resource, wastage, and post-administrative clinical effects to fully assess the impact of surfactant products in this setting.

Management of neonatal patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) often is resource-intensive and costly. Therefore, it is in hospitals' best interests to ensure the most cost-efficient use of associated resources. Clinical status, comorbidities, and response to prior therapy are considered in selecting the most appropriate intervention for PDA management. Currently, supportive measures (e.g., fluid restriction), surgical ligation, and pharmacologically based medical therapy are the primary treatment modalities for correcting PDA. Medical therapy, which comprises a small percentage (2.0%–5.0%)1 of overall PDA treatment expenses in the United States, consists of either of the 2 intravenous (IV) cyclooxygenase (COX) inhibitors: IV indomethacin and the newly available IV ibuprofen lysine. Although IV COX inhibitors represent a small portion of medical expenses, their benefits appear to be considerable. Pharmacoeconomic studies have evaluated indomethacin's beneficial impact on cost-effectiveness per quality-adjusted life year in PDA prophylaxis; however, no analysis to date prospectively assesses the effect of COX inhibitors on resource use or expenses in treating PDA. Such analysis is desirable and should consider efficacy and safety outcomes, impact on health care resource use and length of stay (LOS), and any differential effects of the agents' safety profiles; notably, IV indomethacin adversely affects renal and mesenteric blood flow and increases serum creatinine and oliguria significantly more than IV ibuprofen. These observations lay the foundation to conduct studies assessing the influence of these differences on resource use, LOS and expenses associated with PDA management.

To assess the efficacy and safety of 2 different strengths of a manufactured albuterol solution for nebulization (AccuNeb(R); DEY, L.P., Napa, Calif), 349 children with moderate to severe asthma were enrolled in this prospective, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. For 4 wk, children 6 to 12 y old were randomly assigned to 1.25 mg (A1) or 0.62 mg (A2) albuterol or placebo (P), nebulized 3 times daily for 4 weeks. Pulmonary function and safety were evaluated at weeks 0, 2, and 4 (visits 2-4). Nonparametric tests (Kruskal-Wallis and Wilcoxon's rank-sum) were used to compare treatments. Primary endpoint (week 4, %Delta area under the curve [AUC] forced expiratory volume in 1 sec [FEV(1)]) results for A1, A2, and P were 90.3% x h*, 73.6% x h*, and 34.2% x h. Secondary assessments for A1, A2, and P were as follows: (1) week 2, %DeltaAUC FEV1 (99.5%*h*, 104.5% x h*, and 43.6% x h); (2) maximum FEV1 (28.6%*, 26.3%*, and 13.4%); and (3) duration of effect (116.8 min*, 115.9 min*, and 39.2 min). A2 was more effective in children 10 y of age or younger and in children 11 to 12 y of age who weighed/=40 kg or had less severe asthma; A1 was more effective in children 11 to 12 y of age who weighed40 kg or had more severe asthma. Adverse events (occurring in 47% of children) were considered unrelated to drug treatment. Observations on electrocardiogram (notably QTc interval) were similar to those for placebo. A1 and A2 appeared effective in improving pulmonary function and were well tolerated in children aged 6 to 12 y.