Evaluation of the Safety of Slow IV Push Versus Slow IV Infusion Administration of 23.4% Sodium Chloride.

Background and Purpose: Increased intracranial pressure due to cerebral edema is a medical emergency in which 23.4% sodium chloride (23.4% NaCl) may be a lifesaving intervention. Currently, safety data is limited on slow IV push (IVP) administration. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of IVP administration of 23.4% NaCl and determine the number of infusion-related adverse events (IRAEs) compared to slow IV infusion (SIV) administration. Methods: We performed a retrospective review of patients who received a dose of 23.4% NaCl at the (removed institution) from January 2015 to June 2020 as either SIV over 30 minutes or IVP over 2-5 minutes. Results: In total, 81 patients, 55 in the IVP group and 26 in the SIV group, were included in the analysis. There was a significantly faster time from order entry to dose completion (IVP 25 [13,58] vs SIV 73 [55,113] minutes, P < .001). There was no difference in IRAEs between the groups (IVP 17 [31%] vs SIV 6 [23%], P = .466). Hypotension was most common (IVP 13 [24%] vs SIV 5 [19%], P = .656) followed by bradycardia (IVP 6 [11%] vs SIV 1 [4%], P = .291). There were no extravasations reported. Conclusions: Overall, among a cohort of patients with cerebral edema, we found no difference in the incidence of IRAEs between SIV and IVP administration of 23.4% NaCl, and found a faster time to complete administration fssor the latter. In emergent scenarios where time may impact neurologic function, 23.4% NaCl administered IVP may be an alternative to SIV administration.

Antithrombotic management for Impella® temporary ventricular assist devices: An analysis of an academic health-system experience.

The use of acute mechanical circulatory support (MCS) has increased over the last decade. For patients with left-ventricular failure, an Impella® (Abiomed, Danvers, MA) may be used to improve cardiac output. The purpose of this study is to describe Impella® anticoagulation patterns and evaluate the safety and effectiveness of our protocol. This is a retrospective review of all adult patients who required at least 24 h of Impella® support and received a heparin-based purge solution. In total, 109 patients were included in the final analysis. The most common indication for Impella® device insertion was cardiogenic shock (76%) with the remaining patients receiving a device for a high-risk procedures; typically coronary artery bypass grafting or percutaneous coronary intervention. A total of 9 thrombotic events occurred among 8 (7%) patients and 50 bleeding events occurred among 43 (39%) patients, with the most common classification being BARC 3a (60%). A univariate analysis revealed that patients were more likely to bleed if they were less than 65 years old, had an indication of cardiogenic shock for Impella®, inserted the device peripherally, were on dual antiplatelet therapy, or had an intra-aortic balloon pump prior to Impella® insertion, the latter of which was confirmed with a multivariate analysis (OR 2.5 [1.072-5.830]; p = 0.034). For those monitored by anti-Xa, the presence of two or more values greater than 0.40 IU/mL was a risk factor for bleeding (p = 0.037). Our study identifies risk factors for bleeding in patients receiving temporary MCS with an Impella®.

Evaluation of Direct Oral Anticoagulants Versus Warfarin for Intracardiac Thromboses.

ABSTRACT: Intracardiac thrombus (ICT) formation is a common complication of several cardiovascular diseases. Warfarin is recommended for treatment of ICT by guidelines based on observational studies occurring before the advent of nonvitamin K antagonist direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs). We aim to evaluate the current prescribing patterns at our institution and to compare the efficacy and safety profiles of warfarin versus DOACs for ICT. This is a retrospective review of adult patients treated with oral anticoagulation for ICT between May 2013 and December 2019. Our primary end point was complete thrombus resolution. Secondary outcomes included time to resolution of thrombus, treatment failure, and duration of therapy. Safety end points included stroke and systemic embolization (SSE) and bleeding events. A total of 123 patients were included (DOAC n = 61; warfarin n = 62). At baseline, more patients in the DOAC group had anemia [6 (10%) vs. 0 (0%), P = 0.013] and alcohol use disorder [6 (10%) vs. 0 (0%), P = 0.013]. Complete thrombus resolution occurred in 50 (82%) and 46 (74%) patients in the DOAC and warfarin groups, respectively (P = 0.298). There was a shorter time to thrombus resolution in the DOAC group versus the warfarin group {63 days [interquartile range (IQR) 40-138] vs. 123 days [IQR 86-244], P = 0.003}. There were no differences found in SSE or bleeding between the groups [DOAC 11 (19%) vs. warfarin 17 (28%), P = 0.213]. For patients with an ICT, treatment with a DOAC for at least 3 months may be a comparable alternative to warfarin in safety and efficacy.

Professional and pre-professional pharmacy students' perceptions of team based learning (TBL) at a private research-intensive university.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Pharmacy students need to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills as well as be a valuable team member. The use of team based learning (TBL) fosters effective team collaboration, enables continuous active and self-directed learning, and requires both individual and team accountability. The purpose was to evaluate pharmacy students' perceptions and experiences related to TBL in different years of the pharmacy curriculum. EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITY AND SETTING: Two classes, Introduction to the Profession of Pharmacy (intro), a required course, and Self-Care/Non-Prescription Medications (self-care), an elective course, utilize the TBL approach. Students enrolled in both courses were recruited to complete a validated questionnaire during the last class. FINDINGS: There was 100% participation; the majority of students, regardless of course, expressed positive attitudes towards TBL. Variations, relevance of TBL activities and the use of TBL as a learning strategy, between the required intro class and the elective self-care class were observed using a Mann-Whitney U test (p<0.05). DISCUSSION: Both cohorts of pharmacy students positively rated the TBL sessions in terms of learning effectiveness. It's important to consider the differences in professional development in these students and how this may impact their perceptions of TBL. TBL imparts more responsibility and accountability on the individual student allowing for the development of self-directed learners. SUMMARY: Students, regardless of their year, found TBL to be an effective learning strategy. Third professional year (P3) pharmacy students further along in the curriculum are more accepting of TBL and are better able to appreciate the benefits of active and self-directed learning as well as working within a team.