Timing and incidence of postoperative infections associated with blood transfusion: analysis of 1,489 orthopedic and cardiac surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Transfusion rates remain high in cardiac and orthopedic surgery and differ widely across physician practices in spite of growing knowledge that allogeneic blood transfusion (ABT) is associated with a risk of postoperative infection. METHODS: This prospective observational study compared the timing and incidence of ABT-associated postoperative infections (PIs) in 1,489 orthopedic or cardiac surgery patients at nine hospitals. RESULTS: Of 455 cardiovascular and 1,034 orthopedic surgery patients, 415 (55.6% of the cardiovascular patients and 15.7% of the orthopedic patients) were given ABT. The overall rate of PI during hospitalization was 5.8%. The relative risk of PI was 3.6-fold greater after ABT (50 patients; 12.1%) than in patients not having ABT (36 patients; 3.4%; 95% confidence interval 2.4, 5.4; p = 0.001). Postoperative infections appeared both during hospitalization (n = 86) and within four weeks after discharge (n = 81). CONCLUSIONS: Patients should be followed for as long as four weeks after discharge to determine the true incidence and risk of ABT-associated PI.

Challenges in the transition to model-based development.

Practitioners of the art and science of pharmacometrics are well aware of the considerable effort required to successfully complete modeling and simulation activities for drug development programs. This is particularly true because of the current, ad hoc implementation wherein modeling and simulation activities are piggybacked onto traditional development programs. This effort, coupled with the failure to explicitly design development programs around modeling and simulation, will continue to be an important obstacle to the successful transition to model-based drug development. Challenges with timely data availability, high data discard rates, delays in completing modeling and simulation activities, and resistance of development teams to the use of modeling and simulation in decision making are all symptoms of an immature process capability for performing modeling and simulation. A process that will fulfill the promise of model-based development will require the development and deployment of three critical elements. The first is the infrastructure--the data definitions and assembly processes that will allow efficient pooling of data across trials and development programs. The second is the process itself--developing guidelines for deciding when and where modeling and simulation should be applied and the criteria for assessing performance and impact. The third element concerns the organization and culture--the establishment of truly integrated, multidisciplinary, and multiorganizational development teams trained in the use of modeling and simulation in decision-making. Creating these capabilities, infrastructure, and incentivizations are critical to realizing the full value of modeling and simulation in drug development.

The cost-effectiveness of cefepime plus metronidazole versus imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infection.

BACKGROUND: Our objective was to compare the economic benefits of cefepime plus metronidazole with those of imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections. METHODS: We used a retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and health resource utilization data collected during a randomized, double-blind, multi-center clinical trial. Seventeen university-affiliated hospitals in the United States and Canada participated, as did 323 patients with complicated intra-abdominal infections. Decision analysis was conducted using a decision node of cefepime vs. imipenem, and chance nodes that included an Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score of #15 versus .15; a need for posttreatment surgical procedures; and clinical outcomes. Effectiveness of treatment was measured by differences in the length and cost of hospital stays, the number and cost of surgical procedures after treatment, cure rates, and the cost of antibiotics. Also evalulated were the incremental costs of cure (i.e., the costs of additional cures). RESULTS: Comparing cefepime plus metronidazole with imipenem/cilastatin, the expected cost of patient care was $8,218 versus $10,414, respectively, and the cost-effectiveness ratio per cure was $10,058 versus $13,685. For severely ill patients (APACHE II score .15), the expected cost was $12,962 versus $23,153, and the cost-effectiveness ratio per cure was $15,321 versus $64,313. CONCLUSIONS: Cefepime plus metronidazole was more cost-effective than imipenem/cilastatin in the treatment of complicated intra-abdominal infections, primarily because of fewer post-treatment surgical procedures and shorter hospital stays. The primary advantage accrued to severely ill patients who had an APACHE II score .15.

Eliminating intensive postoperative care in same-day surgery patients using short-acting anesthetics.

BACKGROUND: A multidisciplinary effort was undertaken to determine whether patients could safely bypass the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) after same-day surgery by moving to an earlier time point evaluation of recovery criteria. METHODS: A prospective, outcomes research study with a baseline month, an intervention month, and a follow-up month was designed. Five surgical centers (three community-based hospitals and two freestanding ambulatory surgical centers) were utilized. Two thousand five hundred eight patients were involved in the baseline period, and 2,354 were involved in the follow-up period. Outcome measures included PACU bypass rates and adverse events. Intervention consisted of a multidisciplinary educational program and routine feedback reports. RESULTS: The overall PACU bypass rate (58%) was significantly different from baseline (15.9%, P < 0.001), for patients to whom a general anesthetic was administered (0.4-31.8%, P < 0.001), and for those given other anesthetic techniques (monitored anesthesia care, regional or local anesthetics; 29.1-84.2%, P < 0.001). During the follow-up period, the average (SD) recovery duration for patients who bypassed the PACU was significantly shorter compared to that for patients who did not bypass, 84.6 (61.5) versus 175.1 (98.8) min, P < 0.001, with no change in patient outcome. Patients receiving only short-acting anesthetics were 78% more likely (P < 0.002) to bypass the PACU after adjusting for various surgical procedures. CONCLUSIONS: This study represents a substantial change in clinical practice in the perioperative setting. Same-day surgical patients given short-acting anesthetic agents and who are awake, alert, and mobile requiring no parenteral pain medications and with no bleeding or nausea at the end of an operative procedure can safely bypass the PACU.