Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother ; 37(1): 3-15, 2023 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36519288

RESUMO

Opioid stewardship is one essential function of pain and palliative care pharmacists and a critical need in the United States. In recent years, this country has been plagued by two public health emergencies: an opioid crisis and the COVID-19 pandemic, which has exacerbated the opioid epidemic through its economic and psychosocial toll. To develop an opioid stewardship program, a systematic approach is needed. This will be detailed in part here by the Opioid Stewardship Taskforce of the Society of Pain and Palliative Care Pharmacists (SPPCP), focusing on the role of the pharmacist. Many pain and palliative care pharmacists have made significant contributions to the development and daily operation of such programs while also completing other competing clinical tasks, including direct patient care. To ensure dedicated time and attention to critical opioid stewardship efforts, SPPCP recommends and endorses opioid stewardship models employing a full time, opioid stewardship pharmacist in both the inpatient and outpatient setting. Early research suggests that opioid stewardship pharmacists are pivotal to improving opioid metrics and pain care outcomes. However, further research and development in this area of practice is needed and encouraged.


Assuntos
Analgésicos Opioides , COVID-19 , Humanos , Estados Unidos , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Farmacêuticos , Cuidados Paliativos , Manejo da Dor , Pandemias , Dor/tratamento farmacológico
2.
J Palliat Med ; 24(9): 1358-1363, 2021 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33625895

RESUMO

Introduction: The palliative care (PC) pharmacist's role within PC teams is increasingly recognized with favorable outcomes being reported. Methods: Retrospective study evaluated hospitalized adults seen by PC pharmacists, as part of PC consultation team at three California institutions. The primary objective was to categorize pharmacists' interventions. Secondary end points included length from admission to PC pharmacist involvement and symptom improvement following pharmacist intervention. Results: Data were collected for a total of 557 patients. Over the study period, the PC pharmacists provided 1466 medication recommendations and 2545 nonsymptom-based interventions. Average length of stay (LOS) was 15.6 days with mean time to PC service referral of 3.6 days. PC pharmacist consult occurred after a mean of 4.3 days after PC team consulted. LOS was significantly lower if seen by PC pharmacist within 72 hours of PC consultation, 12.3 days versus 24.5 days (p < 0.001), as well as when serving as lead clinician 9.3 days versus 15.5 days (p < 0.001). Achievement of severity goal was significantly higher at 24 and 72 hours assessment periods when received a medication recommendation for pain, dyspnea, anxiety, and constipation. Conclusion: PC pharmacists provide substantial transdisciplinary interventions. Significantly decreased LOS was found when PC pharmacist was involved within 72 hours of initial PC consultation and when served as lead clinician. Improved symptom goal attainment was demonstrated for pain, dyspnea, anxiety, and constipation. In summary, integration of a PC pharmacist on a PC team can be relied upon to provide patient-centered, transdisciplinary care and enhance symptom management.


Assuntos
Cuidados Paliativos , Farmacêuticos , Adulto , Humanos , Assistência Centrada no Paciente , Papel Profissional , Encaminhamento e Consulta , Estudos Retrospectivos
3.
J Pain Palliat Care Pharmacother ; 34(2): 90-98, 2020 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32091938

RESUMO

Lidocaine infusion for pain control has been used for years. While some centers transition from continuous infusion lidocaine to oral mexiletine, there are no published studies to guide this conversion in pain and palliative care settings. This is a retrospective case series of 10 cancer patients across four institutions, with attention to dosing of both agents, and subsequent decrease in morphine-equivalent daily dosing (MEDD). The mean age was 55 years (range 34-78). The mean bolus dose of lidocaine was 1.6 mg/kg, infused over an average of 24 minutes, followed by a mean continuous infusion rate of 1.1 mg/kg/hr, and the infusion was continued for an average of 14.1 hours (range of 0.2 - 28 hours). The mean starting daily mexiletine dose was 400 mg (in 2-3 divided doses) and final dosing averaged 500 mg/day. The mean MEDD prior to starting lidocaine was 1118 mg/24 hours, which, by the time of final mexiletine dosing, was 882 mg/24 hours, a 21% MEDD reduction. The average hospital length of stay was 14 days. There was no lidocaine-induced toxicity and no lidocaine levels were obtained. Two of the 10 patients stopped mexiletine early, one from confusion four days after initiation of mexiletine, and the other after six weeks due to dizziness and visual changes. For cancer patients with suboptimal pain control on large doses of opioid, lidocaine infusion followed by oral mexiletine was well tolerated and effective.


Assuntos
Anestésicos Locais/administração & dosagem , Dor do Câncer/tratamento farmacológico , Lidocaína/administração & dosagem , Mexiletina/administração & dosagem , Dor Intratável/tratamento farmacológico , Administração Oral , Adulto , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Infusões Intravenosas , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...