Pharmacist care in hospital emergency departments: a consensus paper from the Spanish hospital pharmacy and emergency medicine associations. / Atención farmacéutica en los servicios de urgencias: documento de posicionamiento de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria (SEFH) y la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias (SEMES).

OBJECTIVES: To draft a list of actions and quality indicators for pharmacist care in hospital emergency departments, based on consensus among a panel of experts regarding which actions to prioritize in this setting. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A panel of experts from the Spanish Society of Hospital Pharmacy (SEFH) and the Spanish Society of Emergency Medicine (SEMES) evaluated a preliminary list of potential actions and quality of care indicators. The experts used a questionnaire to assess the proposals on the basis of available evidence. In the first round, each expert individually assessed the importance of each proposed action based on 4 dimensions: evidence base, impact on clinical response and patient safety, ease of implementation, and priority. In the second round the experts attended a virtual meeting to reach consensus on a revised list of proposals; suggestions and comments that had been made anonymously in the first round were included. The group then prioritized each action as basic, intermediate, or advanced. RESULTS: The experts evaluated a total of 26 potential actions and associated quality indicators. No items were eliminated in the analysis of scores and comments from the first round. After the second round, 25 actions survived. Nine were considered basic, 10 intermediate, and 6 advanced. CONCLUSION: The expert panel's list of pharmacist actions and care quality indicators provides a basis for developing a pharmacist care program in Spanish emergency departments on 3 levels of priority. The list can serve as a guide to pharmacists, managers, physicians, and nurses involved in the effort to improve drug therapy in this hospital setting.

OBJETIVO: Desarrollar un conjunto de actividades e indicadores de atención farmacéutica en los servicios de urgencias hospitalarios mediante un consenso colectivo de un panel de expertos que permita priorizar las actividades a realizar por los farmacéuticos en estas unidades. METODO: Un comité formado por miembros de la Sociedad Española de Farmacia Hospitalaria (SEFH) y de la Sociedad Española de Medicina de Urgencias y Emergencias (SEMES) evaluó una propuesta inicial de actividades e indicadores potenciales, basados en la evidencia científica disponible, en formato de cuestionario. En una primera ronda, cada uno de los expertos del panel clasificó de forma individual la relevancia de cada una de las actividades propuestas en cuatro dimensiones: evidencia científica, impacto en la respuesta clínica y seguridad para el paciente, facilidad de implementación y grado de prioridad. La segunda ronda se realizó mediante una reunión grupal de forma virtual, a partir del cuestionario modificado de acuerdo con las sugerencias planteadas, así como los comentarios vertidos por los participantes del panel de forma anónima. En esta ronda, cada actividad fue clasificada por consenso como básica, intermedia o avanzada en función del grado de prioridad de implantación considerado por el grupo de expertos. RESULTADOS: Se propusieron un total de 26 potenciales actividades a los expertos, con indicadores asociados. Tras el análisis de las puntuaciones y los comentarios realizados en la primera ronda, no se eliminó ninguna de las actividades propuestas. Tras la segunda ronda, se mantuvieron 25 actividades, de las cuales se puntuaron 9 como actividades básicas, 10 actividades como intermedias y 6 actividades como avanzadas. CONCLUSIONES: El desarrollo del conjunto de actividades e indicadores de atención farmacéutica en urgencias, priorizados por grado de relevancia para la unidad, es la base para el desarrollo de esta cartera de servicios en los hospitales españoles, y sirve como guía tanto para farmacéuticos como para gestores, médicos y enfermeros de la unidad a fin de mejorar la farmacoterapia los pacientes atendidos en los servicios de urgencias.

Severe community-acquired Streptococcus pneumoniae bacterial meningitis: clinical and prognostic picture from the intensive care unit.

BACKGROUND: Severe community-acquired pneumococcal meningitis is a medical emergency. The aim of the present investigation was to evaluate the epidemiology, management and outcomes of this condition. METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational and multicenter cohort study. Sixteen Spanish intensive care units (ICUs) were included. Demographic, clinical and microbiological variables from patients with Streptococcus pneumoniae meningitis admitted to ICU were evaluated. Clinical response was evaluated at 72 h after antibiotic treatment initiation, and meningitis complications, length of stay and 30-day mortality were also recorded. RESULTS: In total, 255 patients were included. Cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) culture was positive in 89.7%; 25.7% were non-susceptible to penicillin, and 5.2% were non-susceptible to ceftriaxone or cefotaxime. The most frequent empiric antibiotic regimen was third-generation cephalosporin (47.5%) plus vancomycin (27.8%) or linezolid (12.9%). A steroid treatment regimen was administered to 88.6% of the patients. Clinical response was achieved in 65.8% of patients after 72 h of antibiotic treatment. Multivariate analysis identified two factors associated with early treatment failure: invasive mechanical ventilation (OR 10.74; 95% CI 3.04-37.95, p < 0.001) and septic shock (OR 1.18; 95% CI 1.03-1.36, p = 0.017). The 30-day mortality rate was 13.7%. Only three factors were independently associated with 30-day mortality: delay in start of antibiotic treatment (OR 18.69; 95% CI 2.13-163.97, p = 0.008), Sepsis-related Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.12-1.66, p = 0.002) and early treatment failure (OR 21.75 (3.40-139.18), p = 0.001). Neurological complications appeared in 124 patients (48.63%). CONCLUSIONS: Mortality rate in critically ill patients with pneumococcal meningitis is lower than previously reported. Delay in antibiotic treatment following admission is the only amendable factor associated with mortality.

New evidence in severe pneumonia: meropenem-vaborbactam

The appearance and spread of new mechanisms of bacterial resistance to antibiotics is a serious health problem. Oneof the most difficult resistance mechanisms to treat is theproduction of carbapenemases. Carbapenemase KPC is one ofthose mechanisms with few therapeutic options. Meropenem-vaborbactam has shown great efficacy against this type ofmicroorganism, both from a clinical and microbiological pointof view. Its good pharmacokinetics, including in the lung, andits safety profile make meropenem-vaborbactam an excellenttherapeutic option. Finally, the absence of resistance genesisduring treatment seems to indicate that its efficacy will belong-lasting. (AU)

Oral Ribavirin for Treatment of Respiratory Syncytial Virus in Lung Transplantation Recipients.

BACKGROUND: Respiratory syncytial virus (RSV) can cause severe respiratory infection and is a risk factor for development of bronchiolitis obliterans syndrome (BOS) in patients who have undergone lung transplantation (LT). The treatment options are limited in this population. We assessed the efficacy of oral administration for the treatment of RSV infection after LT. METHODS: A retrospective case-control was conducted in LT patients who documented RSV infection. Demographic, clinical, and efficacy variables (resolution infection, recovery of lung function, incidence of BOS, mortality) was compared between the oral ribavirin (RBV) group and the control group. RESULTS: Thirty-six LT patients were included (19 RBV group, 17 control group). Significant differences were found for age, sex and coinfections. However, no differences of immunosuppressive level and baseline forced expiratory volume in the first second of expiration (FEV1) were found. RSV clearance was evident in 5 patients (26.3%) of the RBV group vs 2 patients (11.8%) in the control group (odds ratio [OR], 0.37; P = .282). At 3 months, FEV1 remained stable in 12 patients (80%) of the RBV group vs 13 patients (81.3%) of the control group (OR, 0.92; P = .321). At 6 months, FEV1 remained stable in 11 patients (73.3%) of the RBV group and 12 patients (75%) of the control group (OR, 1.25; P = .779), and BOS appeared in 6 patients (31.6%) vs 4 patients (23.5%) of the control group (OR, 1.50; P = .591). Mortality rates were 26% (5 patients) in the RBV group vs 29.4% (5 patients) in the control group (OR, 1.40; P = .637). CONCLUSIONS: No significant differences in efficacy parameters were found between groups; however, stabilization without worsening of respiratory function was observed at 3 and 6 months. Because of the variability in the treatment regimen and the heterogeneity of groups, a protocol was developed to standardize and evaluate the use of oral RBV as treatment for RSV in LT.

Impact of ABC single nucleotide polymorphisms upon the efficacy and toxicity of induction chemotherapy in acute myeloid leukemia.

Anthracycline uptake could be affected by efflux pumps of the ABC family. The influence of 7 SNPs of ABC genes was evaluated in 225 adult de novo acute myeloid leukemia (AML) patients. After multivariate logistic regression there were no significant differences in complete remission, though induction death was associated to ABCB1 triple variant haplotype (p = .020). The ABCB1 triple variant haplotype was related to higher nephrotoxicity (p = .016), as well as this haplotype and the variant allele of ABCB1 rs1128503, rs2032582 to hepatotoxicity (p = .001; p = .049; p < .001). Furthermore, the variant allele of ABCC1 rs4148350 was related to severe hepatotoxicity (p = .044), and the variant allele of ABCG2 rs2231142 was associated to greater cardiac (p = .004) and lung toxicities (p = .038). Delayed time to neutropenia recovery was observed with ABCB1 rs2032582 variant (p = .047). This study shows the impact of ABC polymorphisms in AML chemotherapy safety. Further prospective studies with larger population are needed to validate these associations.