Real world effectiveness of tixagevimab/cilgavimab (Evusheld) in the Omicron era.

BACKGROUND: Pre-exposure prophylaxis for COVID-19 with tixagevimab/cilgavimab (T/C) received Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) based on results of a clinical trial conducted prior to the emergence of the Omicron variant. The clinical effectiveness of T/C has not been well described in the Omicron era. We examined the incidence of symptomatic illness and hospitalizations among T/C recipients when Omicron accounted for virtually all local cases. METHODS: Through retrospective electronic medical record chart review, we identified patients who received T/C between January 1 -July 31, 2022 within our quaternary referral health system. We determined the incidence of symptomatic COVID-19 infections and hospitalizations due to or presumed to be caused by early Omicron variants before and after receiving T/C (pre-T/C and post-T/C). Chi square and Mann-Whitney Wilcoxon two-sample tests were used to examine differences between the characteristics of those who got COVID-19 before or after T/C prophylaxis, and rate ratios (RR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to assess differences in hospitalization rates for the two groups. RESULTS: Of 1295 T/C recipients, 105 (8.1%) developed symptomatic COVID-19 infection before receiving T/C, and 102 (7.9%) developed symptomatic disease after receiving it. Of the 105 patients who developed symptomatic infection pre-T/C, 26 (24.8%) were hospitalized, compared with six of the 102 patients (5.9%) who were diagnosed with COVID-19 post-T/C (RR = 0.24; 95% CI = 0.10-0.55; p = 0.0002). Seven of the 105 (6.7%) patients infected pre-T/C, but none of the 102 infected post-T/C required ICU care. No COVID-related deaths occurred in either group. The majority of COVID-19 cases among those infected pre-T/C treatment occurred during the Omicron BA.1 surge, while the majority of post-T/C cases occurred when Omicron BA.5 was predominant. In both groups, having at least one dose of vaccine strongly protected against hospitalization (pre-T/C group RR = 0.31, 95% CI = 0.17-0.57, p = 0.02; post-T/C group RR = 0.15; 95% CI = 0.03-0.94; p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: We identified COVID-19 infections after T/C prophylaxis. Among patients who received T/C at our institution, COVID-19 Omicron cases occurring after T/C were one-fourth as likely to require hospitalization compared to those with Omicron prior to T/C. However, due to the presence of changing vaccine coverage, multiple therapies, and changing variants, the effectiveness of T/C in the Omicron era remains difficult to assess.

Implementation of a Medication Reconciliation Risk Stratification Tool Integrated within an electronic health record: A Case Series of Three Academic Medical Centers.

Medication errors during transitions of care are common, dangerous and costly. Medication reconciliation can help mitigate this risk, but it is a complex and time-consuming process when performed properly. Increasingly, pharmacy staff have been engaged to help improve medication reconciliation. However, many organizations lack the resources and staff required to perform accurate medication histories and other reconciliation tasks on all patients. We describe how three academic medical centers implemented risk scoring systems to allocate limited pharmacy resources to patients with the highest likelihood of medication reconciliation related errors. We found that (1) development of a tailored medication risk scoring system and integration into the electronic health record is feasible, (2) workflow around the risk calculator is critical to the success of the implementation, and (3) the complex coordination of professional disciplines during the medication reconciliation process remains an ongoing challenge at all three institutions.