Home intravenous antibiotherapy and the proper use of elastomeric pumps: Systematic review of the literature and proposals for improved use.

Over several decades, the economic situation and consideration of patient quality of life have been responsible for increased outpatient treatment. It is in this context that outpatient antimicrobial treatment (OPAT) has rapidly developed. The availability of elastomeric infusion pumps has permitted prolonged or continuous antibiotic administration by dint of a mechanical device necessitating neither gravity nor a source of electricity. In numerous situations, its utilization optimizes administration of time-dependent antibiotics while freeing the patient from the constraints associated with infusion by gravity, volumetric pump or electrical syringe pump and, more often than not, limiting the number of nurse interventions to one or two a day. That much said, the installation of these pumps, which is not systematically justified, entails markedly increased OPAT costs and is liable to expose the patient to a risk of therapeutic failure or adverse effects due to the instability of the molecules utilized in a non-controlled environment, instability that necessitates close monitoring of their use. More precisely, a prescriber must take into consideration the stability parameters of each molecule (infusion duration, concentration following dilution, nature of the diluent and pump temperature). The objective of this work is to evaluate the different means of utilization of elastomeric infusion pumps in intravenous antibiotic administration outside of hospital. Following a review of the literature, we will present a tool for optimized antibiotic prescription, in a town setting by means of an infusion device.

Cost-effectiveness of Oral Versus Intravenous Ibuprofen Therapy in Preterm Infants With Patent Ductus Arteriosus in the Neonatal Intensive Care Setting: A Cohort-based Study.

PURPOSE: Use of ibuprofen for the patent ductus arteriosus (PDA) has become increasingly common. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical and economic impact of oral ibuprofen versus intravenous ibuprofen for PDA among preterm infants. METHODS: This retrospective, cohort-based pilot study examined the clinical and economic associations of oral versus intravenous ibuprofen for PDA. A decision-analytic model was constructed, from the hospital perspective, to follow the oral versus intravenous administrations of ibuprofen for PDA and their clinical and economic consequences. The course regimen of either formulation was an initial 10 mg/kg followed by 5 mg/kg at 24- and 48-h intervals. Clinical and resource utilization data were extracted from Cerner medical database, from 2014 through 2018, at the tertiary neonatal intensive care unit setting in Qatar. The primary outcome measures were the rate of successful closure based on the ductal diameter measure after the first course of treatment and the overall direct medical cost of PDA management. A population of 118 neonates was required for results with 80% power and 0.05 significance. Sensitivity analyses involving unit costs and a subgroup analysis based on gestational age and birth weight, added to a second-order probabilistic analysis of all model inputs, were performed. FINDINGS: Forty infants were available for inclusion in the oral ibuprofen study group, not achieving the desired sample size, with successful PDA closure reported in 64% of cases compared with a reduced success of 36% with intravenous ibuprofen (n = 59) (risk ratio = 0.56; 95% CI, 0.32-0.97; P = 0.04), which was associated with economic advantage to oral ibuprofen. The probabilistic analysis illustrated that oral ibuprofen costs less than intravenous ibuprofen in 72% of patient cases, with QAR 48,751 (US $13,356) (95% CI, QAR 47,500-50,000, US $13,014-$13,699) in mean savings. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of study conclusions and found that the rate of closure success versus failure was the most influential on results, followed by the occurrence of adverse drug events with both intravenous and oral ibuprofen. Although both ibuprofen formulations had similar safety profiles (P = 0.16), the intravenous formulation was associated with a larger number of adverse drug effects. IMPLICATIONS: This is the first cost-effectiveness evaluation of oral versus intravenous formulations of ibuprofen among infants with PDA. The oral ibuprofen might be associated with an enhanced ductal closure at a considerably lower cost. The study results support recent trends in neonatal intensive care unit practices in favor of the oral administration of ibuprofen.

Effects of a multifaceted intervention to promote the use of intravenous iron sucrose complex instead of ferric carboxymaltose in patients admitted for more than 24 h.

PURPOSE: Although more practical for use, the impact of ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) on the hospital budget is considerable, and intravenous iron sucrose complex (ISC) represents a cost-saving alternative for the management of iron deficiency anemia in patients during hospitalization. The Drug Committee decided to reserve FCM for day hospitalizations and contraindications to ISC, especially allergy. ISC was available for prescription for all other situations. METHODS: The impact of a multifaceted intervention promoting a switch from FCM to ISC was evaluated using an interrupted time series model with segmented regression analysis. The standardized rate of the dispensing of FCM, ISC, and oral iron by the hospital pharmacy, as well as the rate of the dispensing of packed red blood cells and the number of biological iron status measurements, was analyzed before and after the intervention. RESULTS: There was an immediate decrease in FCM consumption following the intervention, with a reduction of 88% (RR: 0.12 [CI95% 0.10 to 0.15]). Conversely, there was a large increase in ISC use (RR: 5.1 [CI95% 4.4 to 5.9]). We did not observe a prescription shift to packed red blood cells or oral iron after the intervention. The time series analysis showed the frequency of iron status testing to remain stable before and after. The direct savings for intravenous iron for 8 months were 187,417.54 €. CONCLUSION: Our intervention to lower the impact of intravenous iron therapy on the hospital budget was effective.

The use of intravenous iron in pregnancy: for whom and when? A survey of Australian and New Zealand obstetricians.

BACKGROUND: Iron deficiency anaemia in pregnancy (IDAP) affects 11-18% of Australian pregnancies and is associated with adverse perinatal outcomes. National prescribing data suggests the use of intravenous iron in pregnancy is increasingly common. This study aimed to: 1) Establish the current patterns of intravenous iron use by Fellows of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians (FRANZCOG) when treating iron deficiency and IDAP including immediately postpartum and; 2) Assess FRANZCOG opinions regarding potential trial of intravenous iron for first-line treatment of IDAP. METHODS: An online survey of RANZCOG Fellows practicing obstetrics was distributed in September 2018. Results were analysed descriptively and responses compared by clinician demographics using Chi-squared testing. RESULTS: Of 484 respondents (21% of FRANZCOG), 457 were currently practicing obstetrics. Most prescribed intravenous iron in pregnancy (96%) and/or postpartum (85%). Most intravenous iron was prescribed for IDAP (98%) rather than iron deficiency without anaemia (53%), and for IDAP most commonly second-line to failed oral iron supplementation and first-line in special circumstances (59%). Intravenous iron prescribing was associated with shorter time since FRANZCOG completion (p = 0.01), public hospital practice (p = 0.008) and higher hospital birth numbers (p = 0.01). Most respondents (90%) would consider a randomised controlled trial of first-line intravenous iron for IDAP, although views on appropriate thresholds differed. CONCLUSIONS: Almost all respondents prescribed intravenous iron for IDAP, and while mostly used for second-line treatment over half sometimes used it first-line. With accelerating intravenous iron use, further research is required into its optimal use in pregnancy, recognizing important clinical outcomes and cost effectiveness.

Outcomes of treatment with CHOP and EPOCH in patients with HIV associated NHL in a low resource setting.

BACKGROUND: The optimal chemotherapy regimen for treating HIV associated NHL in low resource settings is unknown. We conducted a retrospective study to describe survival rates, treatment response rates and adverse events in patients with HIV associated NHL treated with CHOP and dose adjusted-EPOCH regimens at the Uganda Cancer Institute. METHODS: A retrospective study of patients diagnosed with HIV and lymphoma and treated at the Uganda Cancer Institute from 2016 to 2018 was done. RESULTS: One hundred eight patients treated with CHOP and 12 patients treated with DA-EPOCH were analysed. Patients completing 6 or more cycles of chemotherapy were 51 (47%) in the CHOP group and 8 (67%) in the DA-EPOCH group. One year overall survival (OS) rate in patients treated with CHOP was 54.5% (95% CI, 42.8-64.8) and 80.2% (95% CI, 40.3-94.8) in those treated with DA-EPOCH. Factors associated with favourable survival were BMI 18.5-24.9 kg/m2, (p = 0.03) and completion of 6 or more cycles of chemotherapy, (p < 0.001). The overall response rate was 40% in the CHOP group and 59% in the DA-EPOCH group. Severe adverse events occurred in 19 (18%) patients in the CHOP group and 3 (25%) in the DA-EPOCH group; these were neutropenia (CHOP = 13, 12%; DA-EPOCH = 2, 17%), anaemia (CHOP = 12, 12%; DA-EPOCH = 1, 8%), thrombocytopenia (CHOP = 7, 6%; DA-EPOCH = 0), sepsis (CHOP = 1), treatment related death (DA-EPOCH = 1) and hepatic encephalopathy (CHOP = 1). CONCLUSION: Treatment of HIV associated NHL with curative intent using CHOP and infusional DA-EPOCH is feasible in low resource settings and associated with > 50% 1 year survival.

Best Practice Approach to Successful Conversion of Fosaprepitant to Aprepitant IV in a Large Multisite Community Oncology Infusion Center: A Retrospective Analysis.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the impact on cost, time, resource use, and clinic workflow of converting the route of drug administration from a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK-1 RA) 30-min intravenous (IV) infusion to aprepitant IV, and more specifically to IV push, within a multicenter community oncology practice. METHODS: This was a retrospective, multicenter time, motion, and resource/cost evaluation study. Conversion to aprepitant IV was determined by calculating number of doses of aprepitant IV versus fosaprepitant administered in patients receiving moderately or highly emetogenic chemotherapy regimens. Operational advantages (i.e., supply costs, time saved) of switching from fosaprepitant IV infusion to aprepitant administered as a 2-min IV push were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 12,908 doses of aprepitant IV 130 mg were administered at 13 Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers clinics over an 18-month period. Conversion from fosaprepitant to aprepitant IV reached 90% after 9 months of aprepitant IV initiation. Supply costs per administration were reduced ($2.51 to $0.52) when aprepitant was prepared as an IV push versus an NK-1 RA infusion. The overall time savings per administration of aprepitant was reduced by 90% (from 36.5 to 3.5 min, 33 min saved) as an IV push rather than an infusion. Most of the time saved per administration (30 min) pertained to the infusion nurse, and 3 min was saved by the pharmacy technician. CONCLUSION: Successful conversion to aprepitant, and specifically to a 2-min IV push, provides time, cost, and resource savings, improves operational efficiency, and avoids the negative impact of potential future IV fluid shortages.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) can have a major impact on quality of life for patients receiving chemotherapy. Intravenous (IV) aprepitant is an approved neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist (NK-1 RA) that has been effective and safe when administered as part of a guideline-recommended regimen in patients receiving chemotherapy. In addition to being approved as a 30-min infusion, aprepitant IV is the only NK-1 RA approved for administration as a 2-min injection. These factors contributed to Rocky Mountain Cancer Centers (RMCC), which is a physician-owned community oncology practice, evaluating the impact on cost, time, and resource use of converting from a 30-min infusion of fosaprepitant to aprepitant IV, and more specifically a 2-min injection. Within 9 months of implementing aprepitant IV at RMCC, the percent utilization compared to fosaprepitant reached over 90%, signifying a successful conversion within the practice. Furthermore, a 2-min injection of aprepitant IV resulted in several operational advantages compared to a 30-min infusion. When accounting for all 13 clinics within RMCC, total monthly time savings to the practice would be over 28,000 min, or approximately 60 workdays per month of saved time. This new workflow is more efficient and allows for pharmacy technicians to complete other necessary tasks in the pharmacy such as cleaning, organizing, managing inventory, drug ordering, and charge/documentation corrections. Time saved by the nurses could be used for enhanced patient care, thoroughly reviewing chemotherapy or other orders, and assisting other nurses.

Análisis económico del tratamiento ambulatorio intermitente con levosimendán de la insuficiencia cardiaca avanzada en España / Economic analysis of intermittent intravenous outpatient treatment with levosimendan in advanced heart failure in Spain

INTRODUCCIÓN Y OBJETIVOS: La insuficiencia cardiaca (IC) avanzada conlleva altas tasas de hospitalización y mortalidad. El estudio LION-HEART fue un ensayo clínico aleatorizado y controlado con placebo que evaluó la eficacia y la seguridad de la administración intravenosa de dosis intermitentes de levosimendán en pacientes ambulatorios con IC avanzada. El objetivo del presente estudio es realizar un análisis de costes para determinar si la menor tasa de hospitalizaciones por IC observada en pacientes tratados con levosimendán en el estudio LION-HEART puede generar ahorros para el Sistema Nacional de Salud, en comparación con la opción de no tratar a los pacientes con IC avanzada. MÉTODOS: Se realizó un modelo económico que incluyó las tasas de hospitalización por IC del estudio LION-HEART y los costes de hospitalización por IC y de adquisición y administración intravenosa de levosimendán. El horizonte temporal del análisis fue de 12 meses. Se realizaron 2 análisis, uno determinístico y otro probabilístico (simulación de Monte Carlo de segundo orden). RESULTADOS: Según el análisis determinístico, el ahorro total por cada paciente tratado con levosimendán ascendería a -698,48 euros. En el análisis probabilístico, el ahorro por paciente tratado con levosimendán sería de -849,94 (IC95%, 133,12 a -2.255,31) euros. La probabilidad de que se produzcan ahorros con levosimendán en comparación con la opción de no tratar sería del 94,8%. CONCLUSIONES: El tratamiento ambulatorio intermitente con levosimendán puede generar ahorros para el Sistema Nacional de Salud, en comparación con la opción de no tratar a los pacientes con IC avanzada

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: Advanced heart failure (HF) leads to high hospitalization and mortality rates. The LION-HEART study was a randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trial that evaluated the safety and efficacy of intravenous administration of intermittent doses of levosimendan in outpatients with advanced HF. The aim of the present study was to perform a cost analysis to determine whether the lower rate of hospitalizations for HF, observed in patients treated with levosimendan in the LION-HEART study, can generate savings for the Spanish national health system compared with the option of not treating patients with advanced HF. METHODS: An economic model was used that included IC hospitalization rates from the LION-HEART study, the costs of hospitalization due to HF and those of the acquisition and intravenous administration of levosimendan. The time horizon of the analysis was 12 months. Two analyses were carried out, one deterministic and the other probabilistic (second-order Monte Carlo simulation). RESULTS: In the deterministic analysis, the total saving for each patient treated with levosimendan would amount to−€698.48. In the probabilistic analysis, the saving per patient treated with levosimendan would be−€849.94 (95%CI, €133.12 to−€2,255.31). The probability of savings with levosimendan compared with the no treatment option would be 94.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Intermittent ambulatory treatment with levosimendan can generate savings for the Spanish national health system compared with the option of not treating patients with advanced HF

Economics of alternative dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab at a single academic cancer center.

BACKGROUND: The FDA initially approved pembrolizumab and nivolumab for doses based on patient weight, but subsequently amended approval to fixed doses. We estimated savings from novel dosing strategies based on real-world patient data from a single cancer center. METHODS: We analyzed all outpatient doses of pembrolizumab and nivolumab administered at three infusion centers affiliated with our academic hospital between July 1, 2018 and Oct 31, 2018. We estimated savings from several dosing strategies with and without vial sharing between patients. RESULTS: A total of 1029 doses of pembrolizumab or nivolumab were administered for multiple cancer types. For 77% of doses, the weight-based dose was less than the fixed dose. "Dose-minimization" (DM), defined as the lesser of weight-based and fixed dose decreased nivolumab spending by 9% without affecting pembrolizumab spending. DM plus vial sharing decreased pembrolizumab spending by 19% without affecting nivolumab. The differences in savings were due to availability of multiple vial sizes for nivolumab but not pembrolizumab. DM plus vial sharing for both drugs would have saved $1.5 million USD over the 4-month study period. CONCLUSION: New dosing strategies for pembrolizumab and nivolumab can generate large savings without anticipated decrease in efficacy. Barriers include FDA dosing labels, hospital policies against vial sharing, and inaccessibility of smaller vial sizes, which are currently available in other worldwide markets.

Treatment Delays Associated With Prior Authorization for Infusible Medications: A Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: Prior authorizations (PAs) are commonly used by health payers as cost-containment strategies for expensive medications, including infused biologics. There is scarce data about the effect of PA requirements on patient-oriented outcomes. METHODS: We included patients for whom an infusible medication was prescribed for a rheumatologic condition. The exposures of interest were a PA requirement and whether or not the PA was denied. The primary outcome was the difference in days from medication request to infusion. Secondary outcomes included the proportion of denied PAs and differences in glucocorticoid exposure following a PA request. RESULTS: Of the 225 patients, the infusible medications of 160 (71%) required a PA. PAs were associated with a greater number of days to infusion compared to cases in which no authorization was required (median 31 days [interquartile range (IQR) 15-60 days] versus median 27 days [IQR 13-41 days]; P = 0.045), especially among the 33 patients (21%) whose PA was denied initially (median 50 days [IQR 31-76 days] versus median 27 days [IQR 13-41 days]; P < 0.001). PA denials were associated with greater prednisone-equivalent glucocorticoid exposure in the 3 months following the request than when a PA was not required (median 605 mg [IQR 0-1,575] versus median 160 mg [IQR 0-675]; P = 0.01). Twenty-seven of the 33 PA requests that were initially denied (82%) were eventually approved. Thus, 96% of all PAs were ultimately approved. CONCLUSION: PA requirements are associated with treatment delays and denials are associated with greater glucocorticoid exposure. Because the great majority of PA requests are ultimately approved, the value of PA requirements and their impact on patient safety should be reevaluated.

Linezolid versus vancomycin cost in the treatment of staphylococcal pneumonia.

OBJECTIVE: Staphylococcusaureus is involved in around 20% of nosocomial pneumonia cases. Vancomycin used to be the reference antibiotic in this indication, but new molecules have been commercialized, such as linezolid. Previous studies comparing vancomycin and linezolid were based on models. Comparing their real costs from a hospital perspective was needed. METHODS: We performed a bicentric retrospective analysis with a cost-minimization analysis. The hospital antibiotic acquisition costs were used, as well as the laboratory test and administration costs from the health insurance cost scale. The cost of each hospital stay was evaluated using the national cost scale per diagnosis related group (DRG), and was then weighted by the stay duration. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were included. All bacteria identified in pulmonary samples were S. aureus. The cost of nursing care per stay with linezolid was €234.10 (SD=91.50) vs. €381.70 (SD=184.70) with vancomycin (P=0.0029). The cost of laboratory tests for linezolid was €172.30 (SD=128.90) per stay vs. €330.70 (SD=198.40) for vancomycin (P=0.0005). The acquisition cost of linezolid per stay was not different from vancomycin based on the price of the generic drug (€54.92 [SD=20.54] vs. €40.30 [SD=22.70]). After weighting by the duration of stay observed, the mean cost per hospital stay was €47,411.50 for linezolid and €57,694.0 for vancomycin (NSD). CONCLUSION: These results, in favor of linezolid, support other former pharmacoeconomic study based on models. The mean cost per hospitalization stay was not statistically different between the two study groups, but a trend in favor of linezolid is emerging.

Optimization of intravenous immune globulin use at a comprehensive cancer center.

PURPOSE: Intravenous immune globulin (IVIG) is a high-cost medication used in a diverse range of settings. At many institutions, IVIG is dosed using total body weight (TBW). Recent evidence suggests that alternative dosing weights reduce waste without compromising clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to quantify the waste reduction potential generated through the use of alternative IVIG dosing weights. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of all IVIG doses administered from January 2011 through January 2016 to adults (≥18 years). TBW and height at the time of administration were used to calculate prescribed dose (g/kg), ideal body weight (IBW), and adjusted body weight (AdjBW). Three dosing methods were analyzed, as follows: use of AdjBW if TBW is >120% IBW (method 1), AdjBW for all doses (method 2), and IBW for all doses (method 3). Outcomes included potential IVIG use averted, direct drug cost savings, and reductions in outpatient infusion times for each method. RESULTS: A total of 9,918 doses were administered to 2,564 patients over 5 years, representing an average usage of 75,994 g/year. If dosing methods 1, 2, and 3 had been used, the annual use of IVIG would have decreased by 21.9% (16,658 g/year, p < 0.001), 24.2% (18,371 g/year, p < 0.001), and 35.9% (27,252 g/year, p < 0.001), respectively. This translates into average annual cost differences of $2.37 million, $2.62 million, and $3.89 million and average annual outpatient infusion time savings of 841 hours, 920 hours, and 1,366 hours, respectively. CONCLUSION: IVIG dosing optimization through use of alternative dosing weights represents a significant source of waste reduction and cost reduction.

Multicenter study to evaluate the benefits of technology-assisted workflow on i.v. room efficiency, costs, and safety.

PURPOSE: The benefits of technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) compared with manual workflow (non-TAWF) on i.v. room efficiency, costs, and safety at hospitals with more than 200 beds are evaluated. METHODS: Eight hospitals across the United States (4 with TAWF, 4 without) were evaluated, and the characteristics of medication errors and frequency of each error type were measured across the different institutions. The average turnaround time per workflow step and the cost to prepare each compounded sterile preparation (CSP) were also calculated, using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: The TAWF hospital sites detected errors at a significantly higher rate (3.13%) than the non-TAWF hospital sites (0.22%) (p < 0.05). The top error reporting category for the TAWF sites was incorrect medication (63.30%), while the top error reporting category for the non-TAWF sites was incorrect medication volume (18.34%). Use of TAWF was associated with a preparation time decrease of 2.82 min/CSP, a compounding time decrease of 2.94 min/CSP, and a decrease in overall cost to prepare of $1.60/CSP. CONCLUSION: The use of TAWF in the i.v. room was associated with the detection of 14 times more errors than the use of non-TAWF, demonstrating different frequency of error in the results. TAWF also led to a faster preparation time that had a lower cost for preparation.

Multicenter study to evaluate the benefits of technology-assisted workflow on i.v. room efficiency, costs, and safety in small community hospitals.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the benefits of technology-assisted workflow (TAWF) compared to manual workflow (non-TAWF) on i.v. room efficiency, costs, and safety at community hospitals with less than 200 beds. METHODS: Four hospitals in the United States (2 with and 2 without TAWF) were evaluated, and characteristics of medication errors and frequency of each error type were measured across the institutions. The average turnaround time per workflow step and cost to prepare each compounded sterile product (CSP) were also calculated. The results were evaluated using descriptive and inferential statistics. RESULTS: The TAWF hospital sites detected errors at a significantly higher rate (3.78%) compared to the non-TAWF hospital sites (0.13%) (p < 0.05). The top error-reporting category for the TAWF sites was incorrect medication (71.66%), whereas the top error-reporting category for the non-TAWF sites could not be determined because of the small number of errors detected. Use of TAWF may be associated with a decrease in turnaround time and a decrease in overall cost to prepare a CSP. CONCLUSION: Significantly more errors were detected in small community hospitals that use TAWF in the i.v. room compared to those not using it. There were differences in error types observed between technology and nontechnology groups. The use of TAWF was associated with faster preparation times and lower costs of preparation per CSP.

Cost-benefit analysis of the use of tranexamic acid in total replacement hip surgery.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To establish the best dose regimen for tranexamic acid (TXA) in total hip replacement surgery. DESIGN: Secondary analysis based on data from a multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Two hospitals in Spain. INTERVENTIONS: TXA (2 doses) versus placebo. PATIENTS: Consecutive adults who underwent uncemented unilateral total replacement hip surgery. MEASUREMENTS: We estimated the costs associated with TXA use (including consumables, drugs and nurse time) and allogeneic and autologous blood transfusions. For the cost-benefit analysis, we considered the spending on controls to estimate the benefits and the spending on patients in the intervention arms to estimate the costs. The net cost-benefit of TXA administration was calculated by subtracting the costs incurred per patient given TXA from the costs per patient given placebo. MAIN RESULTS: The median total costs per patient were €2.7 (2.4-3.0) in the single-dose group, €6.5 (6.5-7.1) in the two-dose group and €0 (0-190) in the control group (p = 0.001). The blood transfusion costs were €1607.8, €1041.8 and €3115.3 in the single-dose, two-dose and control groups, respectively. The administration of two doses of TXA achieved a greater net cost-benefit than a single dose, the difference being €566 in terms of overall costs. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of TXA is cost-effective, especially in the case of the two-dose regimen studied.

Continuous infusion vs. intermittent flushing of peripheral cannulas in neonates using a needleless connector: a prospective cohort study.

Objective To compare the duration of patency of peripheral intravenous cannulas between continuous infusion and intermittent flushing, while using a needleless intravenous connector in newborns admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Methods This is a prospective cohort study, including neonates admitted to the NICU who needed a peripheral intravenous cannula for intermittent administration of intravenous medication. In the first period, neonates received continuous peripheral infusion with NaCl 0.9% at 0.2 mL/h. In the second period, cannulas were flushed with NaCl 0.9% (0.5 mL before and 0.3 mL after the administration of intravenous medication). Results A total of 113 neonates (210 cannulas) were included in the study, 55 received continuous peripheral infusion and 58 received intermittent flushing. Intermittent flushing resulted in a significantly longer duration of cannula patency compared to continuous infusion (geometric mean 47.1 vs. 35.4 h, P=0.041). The incidence of extravasation was higher with continuous infusion (68.9% vs. 43.2%; P=0.001), while occlusion was more common with intermittent flushing (28.4% vs. 6.6%; P=0.002). Conclusions Intermittent flushing of peripheral cannulas (using needleless intravenous connectors) results in longer cannula patency compared to continuous infusion, in neonates requiring only intermittent administration of medication.

Short Peripheral Catheter Quality and Economics: The Intravenous Quotient.

Peripheral intravenous therapy is an established therapy with known complications and failures. The burden of the cost of unsuccessful short peripheral catheter (SPC) placement and maintenance is not always clearly identified. This often-obscured cost of poor quality needs to be defined and addressed. The scope of the problem is defined here, and a metric that can be applied to measure the magnitude of the problem and identify targets for focused improvement initiatives that would improve the quality of infusion therapy using SPCs is proposed.

Potential cost savings owing to the route of administration of oncology drugs: a microcosting study of intravenous and subcutaneous administration of trastuzumab and rituximab in the Netherlands.

There is little evidence on the costs associated with the route of administration of oncology drugs. We investigated time and resource use for hospitals and patients and compared healthcare and societal costs for intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC) administration of trastuzumab and rituximab. Data for the preparation and administration of both drugs were collected at the hospital pharmacy and at the oncology day care unit. Patients completed a questionnaire for obtaining information on societal costs (productivity losses, informal care and traveling expenses). A total of 126 patients were recruited in six hospitals; 82 received trastuzumab (37 IV and 45 SC) and 44 received rituximab (23 IV and 21 SC). The costs per administration (including societal cost but excluding drug costs) were &OV0556;167 and &OV0556;264 for IV and &OV0556;76 and &OV0556;146 for SC trastuzumab and rituximab, respectively. The costs for SC administration were lower in all categories. The largest cost component was related to time spent at the day care unit (overhead costs). This resulted in savings of &OV0556;47 for SC trastuzumab and &OV0556;69 for SC rituximab. The costs related to time of healthcare professionals was &OV0556;9 lower for both drugs. The costs for consumables resulted in another &OV0556;12 savings. Societal costs were &OV0556;22 lower for SC trastuzumab and &OV0556;28 lower for SC rituximab. Although administration costs are relatively a small part of the total costs, important savings can be generated by switching to an SC route of administration especially because a large number of patients receive oncology drugs and patients receive more than one administration.

Impacto de la protocolización de mezclas intravenosas de fármacos vasoactivos en el coste del tratamiento del paciente crítico / Impact of the implementation of vasoactive drug protocols on costs in the treatment of critically ill patients

Objetivo: Evaluar la eficiencia de la protocolización y centralización de la elaboración de mezclas intravenosas de fármacos vasoactivos en el tratamiento del paciente crítico. Método: Se realizó un estudio prospectivo, de intervención (julio 2012-diciembre 2014) para medir el impacto de la protocolización de mezclas intravenosas en el coste del tratamiento del paciente crítico. Para realizar el análisis económico se compararon los costes directos (fijos y variables) de la preparación de mezclas intravenosas de fármacos vasoactivos en el Servicio de Farmacia versus preparación en planta. Se midieron las variables tiempo y coste de elaboración de una mezcla intravenosa. Para la determinación del coste final de elaboración se incluyeron medicamento, diluyente, material fungible, personal y utilización de las cabinas de flujo laminar. Los costes se midieron en euros. Resultados: La diferencia encontrada en los tiempos de elaboración entre el Servicio de Farmacia y la Unidad de Enfermería (2,10 versus 2,86 minutos) fue estadísticamente significativa y favorable a la elaboración centralizada en el Servicio de Farmacia. El coste medio de elaboración por mezcla fue 5,24 ± 1,45 euros en el Servicio de Farmacia y 5,62 ± 1,55 euros en planta, aunque la diferencia encontrada no alcanzó la significación estadística. Al incluir en el análisis el coste de las mezclas intravenosas caducadas antes de su utilización, la preparación centralizada en el Servicio de Farmacia supuso un coste superior (2.174 euros/año). Conclusiones: La elaboración en el Servicio de Farmacia supone un ahorro significativo de tiempo en comparación con la preparación en planta. La diferencia de coste de esta alternativa, debida principalmente al impacto de las mezclas intravenosas caducadas, se eliminaría al optimizar la producción en la Unidad de Mezclas Intravenosas y al minimizar las pérdidas por caducidad (AU)

Objective: To evaluate the efficiency of the protocolization and centralization of the preparation of intravenous vasoactive drug mixtures in the treatment of critically ill patients. Method: A prospective interventional study (July 2012-December 2014) was conducted to measure the impact of different vasoactive drug protocols on costs in the treatment of critically ill patients. The economic impact was measured by comparing the direct costs (fixed and variable) of the preparation of intravenous vasoactive drug mixtures in the Pharmacy Department with their traditional preparation in hospital care units. The variables time and cost of preparation of an intravenous mixture were measured. Costs included pharmaceutical product, diluent, medical supplies, cost of manpower, and use of laminar flow cabinets in the Pharmacy Department. Costs were measured in Euros. Results: A statistically significant difference was found between processing times in the Pharmacy Department and those in the hospital care unit (2.10 vs 2.86 minutes). Centralized preparation in the Pharmacy Department was more efficient. The average cost of preparation was euros5.24±1.45 in the Pharmacy Department and euros5.62±1.55 in the hospital care unit, although this difference did not reach statistical significance. If the analysis had included the cost of intravenous mixtures that had expired prior to their use, the centralized preparation of the mixtures in the Pharmacy Department would have entailed a higher cost (euros2174/y). Conclusions: The centralized preparation of intravenous mixtures in the Pharmacy Department entails significant time savings compared with their preparation in the hospital care unit. The increased cost of their preparation in the Pharmacy Department would be prevented by optimizing production in this department and reducing losses due to expired intravenous mixtures (AU)