Exploring the intravenous narcotics and controlled drugs wastage and their financial impact: A descriptive single-center study.

Objective: The objectives of this study were to explore the wastage of narcotics and controlled medications and, their financial impact in a tertiary care setting over a one-year period. Methodology: The study period was of one year, i.e., October 2020 - September 2021. The venue of study was a tertiary care hospital. The narcotic medications included Fentanyl, Tramadol, Morphine, and Meperidine. The controlled medications included Midazolam, Phenobarbital, Diazepam, Ketamine and Lorazepam. The annual consumption and wastage of the narcotic and controlled medications were documented using data report generated by narcotics and controlled medication in-charge pharmacist through the hospital's online system. Data was reported using average, minimum and maximum values. Quantities of wastage is expressed in terms of ampoules. Costs per ampoule were calculated and expressed in both Saudi Riyal (SAR) and United States Dollar (USD). The study was approved by an ethics committee. Results: The annual wastage of narcotics was 3.19 % while the same for controlled medications was 21.3 %. An annual wastage of 3.81 % was reported for narcotics and controlled medications combined. The total wastage cost of narcotics and controlled medications was 15,443.1 SAR that was equivalent to USD 4085.5. Fentanyl 500mcg formulations had the highest consumption, i.e., 28,580 ampoules followed by Morphine 10 mg formulations, i.e., 27,122 ampoules. The highest ampoule wastage was observed for Morphine 10 mg formulations, i.e., 1956 ampoules. The highest % wastage was observed for Midazolam formulations, i.e., 29.3 %. Conclusion: The overall wastage was less than 5% of the total consumption, however, midazolam was observed to have the highest wastage. Shifting to prefilled syringes supplied by pharmacies, making protocols, and safely pooling costly drugs could result in significant savings.

Comparative efficacy assessment of antiviral alone and antiviral-antibiotic combination in prevention of influenza-B infection associated complications.

OBJECTIVE: The study aimed to compare the efficacy of antiviral drug alone and antiviral-antibiotic combination therapy in prevention of complications associated with influenza B hospitalized patients. METHOD: Laboratory confirmed influenza B hospitalized patients presented in emergency room after 48 hours of symptoms onset were identified and divided into two groups; Group-1 patients were initiated on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) alone while Group-2 patients were initiated on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) in combination with Antibiotic for at least 3 days. Patients were evaluated for different clinical outcomes among both treatment group. RESULTS: A total of 153 and 131 patients were identified for Group-1 and Group-2, respectively. Clinical outcomes such as secondary bacterial infections (20.9%-vs-9.1%; P = 0.031), need of respiratory support (28.7%-vs-12.9%; P = 0.002), length of hospitalization stay (6.57-vs-4.95 days; P = <0.001), incidences of ICU admission (15.7%-vs-7.6%; P = 0.036), early clinical failure (32.6%-vs-16.1%; P = 0.01), and time to clinical stability (4.83-vs-4.1 days; P = 0.001) were found to be statistically less significant (P-value <0.05) for Group-2 patients. CONCLUSION: Early initiation of antibiotic therapy in combination with oseltamivir was found to be more efficacious than oseltamivir alone in prevention of influenza B-associated complications especially in high-risk influenza patients.

Efficacy comparison of oseltamivir alone and oseltamivir-antibiotic combination for early resolution of symptoms of severe influenza-A and influenza-B hospitalized patients.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the comparative efficacy of oseltamivir alone and oseltamivir-antibiotic therapy for early relief of symptoms associated with severe influenza-A (non-H1N1) and influenza-B infection hospitalized patients. METHODS: In this retrospective multicenter study conducted from 2016-2019, enrolled patients were divided into 2 treatment groups. Group 1 patients were started on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) alone therapy. Group 2 patients were initiated on Antiviral drug (oseltamivir) in combination with Antibiotic therapy. Using acute respiratory illness scoring, symptom severity score was assessed daily for 8 symptoms namely, fever, fatigue, headache, cough, sore throat, wheezing, muscle ache and nasal congestion. For each symptom the severity was scored from scale 0-3. Results: Overall mean ARI severity score was statistically significantly lower (p less than 0.05) on day 2 (14.65-vs-13.68), day 3 (12.95-vs-11.67) and day 4 (10.31-vs-9.12 ) for influenza-A (non-H1N1) while day 3 (12.52-vs-11.87) and day 4 (11.21-vs-10.18) for influenza-B patients for patients who were initiated on oseltamivir-antibiotic combination therapy. Fever, cough and nasal congestion showed statistically significant improvement within 4 days of initiation of combination treatment. Fatigue, sore throat and muscle ache improvement pattern was same for both treatment protocols. CONCLUSION: Oseltamivir-antibiotic combination treatment showed early resolution of some symptoms with cumulatively reduced mean symptom severity score in severe influenza infection hospitalized patients.

Assessment of efficacy of Oseltamivir-Azithromycin combination therapy in prevention of Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection complications and rapidity of symptoms relief.

Objectives: This study aimed to assess the efficacy of oseltamivir-Azithromycin combination therapy for prevention of Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection associated complications and early relief of influenza symptoms.Methods: In a retrospective observational cohort study, Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection hospitalized patients were identified and divided into two groups based on the initial therapy. Group-AV patients were initiated on Oseltamivir without any antibiotic in treatment regimen while Group-AV+AZ patients were initiated on Oseltamivir and Azithromycin combination therapy for at least 3-5 days. Patients were evaluated for different clinical outcomes.Results: A total of 227 and 102 patients were identified for Group-AV and Group-AV+AZ respectively. Multivariate regression analysis showed that incidences of secondary bacterial infections were significantly less frequent (23.4% vs 10.4%; P-value = 0.019) in Group-AV+AZ patients. Group-AV+AZ patients were associated with shorter length of hospitalization (6.58 vs 5.09 days; P-value = <0.0001) and less frequent incidences of respiratory support (38.3% vs 17.6%; P-value = 0.016). Overall influenza symptom severity score was statistically significant less for Group-AV+AZ patients on Day-5 (10.68 ± 2.09; P-value = 0.001) of hospitalization.Conclusion: Oseltamivir-Azithromycin combination therapy was found to be more efficacious as compared to oseltamivir alone in rapid recovery and prevention of Influenza associated complications especially in high risk patients.

Assessment of Antiviral combination therapy with Cephalosporin antibiotic for prevention of severe Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection associated secondary bacterial infection and other complications.

Secondary bacterial infection is considered as a major complication associated with severe Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection responsible for the mortalities and morbidities worldwide. Use of antibiotics in viral Influenza infection is still debatable. All the confirmed diagnosed hospitalized Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection patients fulfilling inclusion/exclusion criteria during the study period were divided into two groups based on drug therapy for initial 72 hours. Group-1 included those patients who received oral oseltamivir alone while Group-2 included patients who were initiated on oseltamivir in combination with empiric cephalosporin antibiotic within 6-8 hours after hospitalization. The patients of both groups were assessed for incidences of various complication associated with Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection. A total of 227 and 116 patients were enrolled for Group-1 and Group-2 respectively. The incidences of secondary bacterial infections were significantly less (P<0.05). Moreover, length of stay in hospitalization, need of ICU admission, multiple organ failure and need of respiratory support were also significantly less (P<0.05) for Group-2 patients. Majority of patients that suffered complications were unvaccinated and aged more than 50 years with multiple comorbidities. Among cephalosporins, cefuroxime was found to be least effective in prevention of Influenza associated complications. Early initiation of empiric antibiotic therapy in combination with oseltamivir can prevent complications associated with Influenza-A (H1N1)pdm09 infection especially in elderly and unvaccinated high risk patients. Different combinations of antibiotics and antiviral medications need to be analysed for the prevention of severe Influenza infection complications.