Accuracy of Spinal Anesthesia Drug Concentrations in Mixtures Prepared by Anesthetists.

OBJECTIVE: Medication errors include the indirect dosing of drugs. For spinal anesthesia mixtures of local anesthetics, opioids are drawn from ampoules and combined in a syringe, according to clinical practice. We set out to determine the accuracy of the drug mixtures. METHODS: Physicians of our department were invited to prepare the mixture used for spinal anesthesia for cesarean section, consisting of 10-mg hyperbaric bupivacaine (2-mL volume), 20-µg fentanyl (0.4-mL volume), and 100-µg morphine (0.1-mL volume). Concentrations of these drugs were determined by means of high performance liquid chromatography. Interindividual and intraindividual variations were assessed. RESULTS: We analyzed 96 samples from 31 physicians. Fifty-one percent of the measured bupivacaine concentrations were in ±10% deviation range of the intended concentration; 17% of the fentanyl and 24% of the morphine concentrations were in this range. A total of 2.1% of the samples had a bupivacaine concentration corresponding to a dose of 8 mg or less, and 11.5% of the samples had a morphine concentration corresponding to a dose of 150 µg or greater. Intraindividual variations were 10.9% for bupivacaine, 24.7% for fentanyl, and 38.9% for morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Our results show a high deviation of the obtained from the intended concentrations. Two percent of the samples had bupivacaine concentrations that probably resulted into an insufficient analgesia, and 11% of the samples had morphine concentrations that, according to guidelines, would require a longer monitoring period than with the intended dose.

A RCT evaluating a pragmatic in-hospital service to increase the quality of discharge prescriptions.

OBJECTIVE: To improve discharge prescription quality and information transfer to improve post-hospital care with a pragmatic in-hospital service. DESIGN: A single-centre, randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Internal medicine wards in a Swiss teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients discharged to their homes, 76 each in the intervention and control group. INTERVENTION: Medication reconciliation at discharge by a clinical pharmacist, a prescription check for formal flaws, interactions and missing therapy durations. Important information was annotated on the prescription. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: At the time of medication dispensing, community pharmacy documented their pharmaceutical interventions when filling the prescription. A Poisson regression model was used to compare the number of interventions (primary outcome). The significance of the pharmaceutical interventions was categorized by the study team. Comparative analysis was used for the significance of interventions (secondary outcome). RESULTS: The community pharmacy staff performed 183 interventions in the control group, and 169 in the intervention group. The regression model revealed a relative risk for an intervention of 0.78 (95% CI 0.62-0.99, p = 0.04) in the intervention group. The rate of clinically significant interventions was lower in the intervention group than in the control group (72 of 169 (42%) vs. 108 of 183 (59%), p < 0.01), but more economically significant interventions were performed (98, 58% vs. 80, 44%, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The pragmatic in-hospital service increased the quality of prescriptions. The intervention group had a lower risk for the need for pharmaceutical interventions, and clinically significant interventions were less frequent. Overall, our pragmatic approach showed promising results to optimize post-discharge care.