Search

Background: Area under the curve to minimum inhibitory concentration (AUC/MIC) has been recommended by the 2020 updated vancomycin guidelines for dosing vancomycin for both efficacy and safety. Previously, AUC/MIC has been cumbersome to calculate so surrogate trough concentrations of 15-20 mg/dL were utilized. However, trough-based dosing is not a sufficient surrogate as AUC/MIC targets of 400-600 can usually be reached without achieving troughs of 15-20 mg/dL. Targeting higher trough levels may also lead to adverse events including acute kidney injury (AKI) and nephrotoxicity. Objective: To compare the mean total first day vancomycin dose in traditional trough-based dosing versus dosing recommended by an AUC/MIC dosing program. Methods: Adult inpatients who received at least 24 hours of IV vancomycin treatment were included in this single-center, retrospective cohort study. The primary endpoint was difference in mean total first day vancomycin dose in milligrams (mg) received between patients’ traditional trough-based dosing and recommended dose via AUC/MIC electronic dosing calculator. Patients served as their own control by analyzing both actual dose received and dose recommended by the electronic AUC/MIC program. Rates of vancomycin induced adverse events, including acute kidney injury, elevated steady-state trough concentrations, and Red Man’s syndrome were also compared between patients who received doses consistent with the AUC/MIC dosing recommendation versus those who did not. Results: 264 patients were included in this study. Initial 24-hour vancomycin exposure was significantly lower with the recommended AUC/MIC dose versus the dose received (2380.7; SD 966.6 mg vs 2649.6; SD 831.8 mg, [95% CI 114.7:423.1] p=0.0007). Conclusions: Utilizing an electronic AUC/MIC vancomycin dosing calculator would result in lower total first day vancomycin doses.

Background: Clinical pharmacists have demonstrated their ability to improve patient outcomes over usual care for patients with type 2 diabetes and glycemic levels above goal, though reasons for this are not well defined. Numerous medications exist for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes and different patterns of medication use by clinical pharmacists may explain these benefits. Objective: The objective of this study was to compare pharmacotherapy approaches to managing patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes receiving basal insulin by a clinical pharmacist versus usual care by a physician or advanced practice provider in a federally qualified health center. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of patients 18 to 85 years old with type 2 diabetes, A1C ≥9%, receiving basal insulin was conducted. Patients were grouped into two cohorts (1) those who received clinical pharmacist care and (2) those who received usual care from a physician or advanced practice provider. The primary outcome evaluated the proportion of patients treated with the addition of a non-basal insulin medication. Type of medication changes or additions as well as change in A1C and change in weight were also analyzed. Outcomes were evaluated at six months post-index A1C. Results: A total of 202 patients were identified (n=129 in the usual care group and n=73 in the clinical pharmacist group). A non-basal insulin medication was added in 29% of patients receiving usual care versus 41% of patients receiving clinical pharmacist care (adjusted p=0.040). Usual care providers more frequently added metformin, sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones, while clinical pharmacists more frequently added prandial insulin, DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors. A1C decreased 1.6% in the clinical pharmacist group versus 0.9% in the usual care group (adjusted p=0.055). No significant change in weight was observed between the clinical pharmacist and usual care group (0.2 kg versus -1.0 kg, respectively; adjusted p=0.175). Conclusions: Pharmacotherapy approaches to managing patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes varied between clinical pharmacists and other clinician providers. For patients already on basal insulin, clinical pharmacists were more likely to intensify therapy with the addition of non-basal insulin, including more frequent initiation of prandial insulin and by adding newer antihyperglycemic agents.

Background: High intensity statin therapy (HIST) is the gold standard therapy for decreasing the risk of recurrent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD); however, little is known about the use of HIST in older adults with ASCVD. Objectives: The aim of this cross-sequential study was to determine trends in statin intensity in older adults over a 10-year timeframe. Methods: The study was conducted in an integrated healthcare delivery system. Patients were 76 years or older with validated coronary ASCVD. Data were collected from administrative databases. Statin intensity level was assessed in eligible patients on January 1st and July 1st from January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2016. Results: Overall, a total of 5,453 patients were included with 2,119 (38.9%) and 3,334 (61.1%) categorized as HIST and Non-HIST, respectively. Included patients had a mean age of 79.8 years and were primarily male and white and had a cardiac intervention. The rate of HIST use increased from 14.5% to 41.3% over the study period (p

Objective: The objective of this study is to compute the potential benefit of Pramipexole ER on total levodopa equivalent dose (LED) and Unified Parkinson Disease Rating Score (UPDRS-III) compared to mono- or combined therapy of pramipexole IR and/or carbidopa/levodopa. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study conducted in a specialized PD (Parkinson Disease) and movement disease center in Lebanon between January and December 2017. Results: A total of 176 patient’s record was reviewed. Pramipexole ER showed a significant difference on the mean changes in LED and UPDRS-III score. After 13 weeks of initiating Pramipexole ER, the mean decrease in LED was -49.42 mg for all patients (p < 0.001, CI 95% [35.28-63.55]) and the mean decrease in UPDRS-III score for all patients was -6 points (P< 0.001). According to the subgroup analysis, patients aged 65 years and below, the change in mean total LED from baseline (350.80 mg) was a decrease of 63.19 mg with a p