Implementation of a multidisciplinary inpatient drug desensitization program.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to analyze the process of adult inpatient drug desensitization and to create a multidisciplinary standardized procedure with the aim of improving patient safety, efficiency, length of stay, and patient satisfaction. SUMMARY: A team consisting of physicians, pharmacists, nurses, critical care specialists, and operational capacity managers was created. The electronic health system was queried to evaluate the frequency of desensitizations, level of care, implicated medications, and length of stay. An electronic desensitization request form was created along with a desensitization team and email listserver for notification of key stakeholders. CONCLUSION: A standardized, safe, and efficient process for inpatient drug desensitization requires advance planning and participation from all disciplines involved. Operational and logistical aspects of desensitization are crucial components of rapid drug desensitization. A structured, multidisciplinary approach to inpatient desensitization is feasible.

Evaluation of the inpatient use of inotuzumab ozogamicin and creation of appropriate use guidelines.

Inpatient use of inotuzumab ozogamicin (IO) at our academic medical center has increased since its FDA approval in 2017. Administration of IO does not require hospitalization and is appropriate for outpatient use. The aim of this report is to assess the appropriateness of use, overall inpatient utilization, and cost of IO. This is a retrospective chart review of patients that received at least one dose of IO while admitted to the hospital. Data points included rationale for inpatient IO administration, hospital admission reason, number of IO doses and number of vials used, length of stay, in-hospital mortality, percentage of admissions that were new-starts, outpatient continuation of IO, use of concomitant regimens, and CD22 positivity. Between September 1, 2017, and June 30, 2022, 55 doses of IO were identified. Of the 29 unique admissions, common rationales for inpatient IO use included high disease burden/tumor lysis syndrome risk (31%) and use of a regimen requiring hospitalization (28%). The rationale for hospitalization was most commonly 'chemotherapy administration' (34%) and 'relapsed/refractory disease' (38%). Median length of stay was 23 days, most were new starts (76%), and 5 patients died during the associated admission. Only 63% of patients continued therapy in the outpatient setting. The inpatient use of IO was associated with a prolonged length-of-stay, a 17% in-hospital mortality, and represents a significant cost burden to the health system. As a result of these findings, guidelines for inpatient use of IO were implemented across the health system.

Physician and Pharmacist: Attitudes, Facilitators, and Barriers to Prescribing Naloxone for Home Rescue.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We implemented a naloxone education and distribution program in our academic health system. Despite the program, naloxone prescribing was not fully realized. This study aimed to identify the barriers to prescribing. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, cross-sectional, mixed-methods study of naloxone prescribers. Participants completed a questionnaire regarding their prescribing practices, attitudes, facilitators, and barriers to prescribing naloxone. Participants were then invited for an interview to further explore these topics and elicit more in-depth explanations. RESULTS: Sixty-four physicians and eight pharmacists completed the questionnaire (n = 72). The most commonly reported barrier to prescribing naloxone was time constraints (33%). During the interviews, 14 subthemes emerged within four themes: provider competency, provider beliefs, health care system, and patient factors/social climate. DISCUSSION: Prescribers identified barriers to naloxone prescribing despite implementation of an institutional overdose education and naloxone distribution (OEND) program. The results were similar to those previously reported prior to initiation of such programs. CONCLUSION: In this study, we examined barriers and facilitators to naloxone prescribing. Although previous studies have shown that health care providers endorsed similar barriers, our study indicates that some of those barriers persist despite a concerted effort to educate and promote prescribing via an OEND. While our study is limited by a small, selective sample size the results indicate that improvements to our OEND program are warranted. SCIENTIFIC SIGNIFICANCE: Our study addressed an unexplored area of OEND research and may inform future program development. (Am J Addict 2019;00:00-00).