Do You Bleed? A 1-Year FOBT Case-Series Study.

GOALS: The goal of this study is to investigate fecal occult blood test's (FOBT) usage in cases of suspected gastrointestinal bleeding and how it may affect hospitalization length and inpatient endoscopy procedures. BACKGROUND: FOBT is an approved modality used in colorectal cancer screening but is often used inappropriately for the investigation of suspected gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) in the hospital setting. The efficiency of FOBT when used for this purpose is questionable. STUDY: This study was performed at a 766-bed tertiary academic medical center. All FOBT performed during a 12-month period were identified and 678 cases were analyzed. The results of FOBT were collected along with information regarding patients' hemoglobin levels, rectal examination frequency, performance of endoscopy, length of hospital stay, and presence/absence of gastrointestinal lesions. RESULTS: There were no findings on endoscopy in 13.5% of cases with positive FOBT, demonstrating weak test sensitivity. Low percentage (14.6%) of patients having negative FOBT results underwent endoscopy, even with negative FOBT results, whereas less than 50% of positive FOBT patients were offered procedural evaluation, demonstrating the inefficiency of FOBT in guiding management. Patients with positive FOBT had longer hospitalization periods. Even in the absence of GIB symptoms, critically anemic patients would still undergo endoscopy for GIB investigation even without FOBT being performed. CONCLUSIONS: FOBT is inappropriately used in the hospital setting for GIB investigation. This study shows the inefficiency of FOBT to guide management and the high frequency of positive inpatient FOBT tests leading to unnecessary endoscopic investigation, longer hospitalizations, and delays in care. FOBT should be limited to the outpatient setting and be avoided while investigating GIB, anemia, etc. in the hospital.

Clostridium difficile Infection Rates During the Pandemic in New York Capital Area: A Single-Center Study.

Introduction Clostridioides difficile (C. difficile) colonizes the large intestine, rendering healthy individuals asymptomatic carriers of the disease. In certain instances, C. difficile infection (CDI) occurs. Antibiotic use remains the leading risk factor for CDI. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, multiple risk and protective factors for and against CDI were identified, and as such multiple studies tried to analyze the pandemic's overall effect on CDI incidence rates, with contradictory results. Our study's aim is to further characterize the CDI incidence rates trends, but for a longer period of 22 months in the pandemic. Methods We included only adult (>18 years) patients, diagnosed with CDI during their hospitalization for the following period: January 1, 2018, to December 31, 2021. Incidence was calculated as cases per 10,000 patient days. The period identified as the COVID-19 pandemic period was the following: March 1, 2020, to December 31, 2021. All analyses were performed by an expert statistician using Minitab software (Minitab Inc., State College, Pennsylvania, United States). Results The mean CDI incidence rate per 10,000 patient-days was 6.86 +/-2.1. The 95% confidence interval for the CDI incidence rate prior to the pandemic was found at 5.67 +/-0.35 while the interval during the pandemic was calculated at 8.06 +/- 0.41 per 10,000 patient days. Those results reveal a statistically significant increase in CDI incidence rates during the COVID-19 era. Conclusion Multiple risk and protective factors for and against hospital-acquired infections (including CDI) have been identified during the unprecedented COVID-19 healthcare crisis. In the literature, there is high controversy regarding the trends of CDI incidence during the pandemic. The current study analyzed an almost two-year period into the pandemic, identifying an increase in CDI rates when compared to the pre-pandemic era.

Ideal Vial Size for Infliximab in the Treatment of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: An Analysis of Pharmaceutical Waste and Physician Opinions.

Background: Infliximab is a weight-based prescription for multiple autoimmune diseases and is dispensed only in single-use, 100mg vials. We aim to compute the quantity of infliximab waste at our site and in an ideal world where weight-based prescribing practices are followed. We estimate hypothetical waste reduction and cost-savings if a smaller vial is dispensed. We also surveyed gastroenterologists to study prescription rounding practices for infliximab. Methods: A pre-existing registry of 426 inflammatory bowel disease patients identified 112 individuals who had received a total of 1003 infliximab administrations from December 2013 to May 2019. We calculated infliximab wastage per administration for the real world and an ideal (weight-based) world. Analysis of potential waste reduction and cost-savings was computed with the hypothetical creation of 50 and 25mg vials. Infliximab-prescribing gastroenterologists completed an online survey, determining reasons for rounding of weight-based prescription, rounding practices, and biosimilar use. Results: At our site, the total value of infliximab wasted was between $112738.08 and $243209.50. Utilizing 50 and 25mg vials would reduce this waste by 92.2% and 99.4%, respectively. If prescriber guidelines were followed precisely, the total value of waste was between $132781.08 and $286448.19. Utilizing 50 and 25mg vials would reduce waste by 50.39% and 75.34%, respectively. The physician survey revealed that 68.1% rounded doses while only 31.9% prescribed exact weight-based doses. Conclusions: Infliximab-prescribing gastroenterologists considered reducing drug waste as a common reason in their rounding practices. Our analysis demonstrates significant waste reduction and cost-savings are possible with the introduction of 50 and 25mg vials.

Is there a need for "triple therapy"? Role of anticoagulation with dual antiplatelet therapy in acute coronary syndromes (ATLAS Study & TRAP Study).

In the past two decades there has been a succession of advances in the development of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapies to be used in the treatment of ACS. Despite optimal dual antiplatelet therapy, nearly 10-12 % of patients still face a risk of death or myocardial infarction one year following PCI. This large residual risk provides the impetus for the development of more effective strategies. Dual pathway regimens that combine antiplatelets (aspirin and a thienopyridine), along with an anticoagulant such as rivaroxaban may prove to be a therapeutic option in patients with ACS.