Search

Introduction The risk for renal complications from hydroxyethyl starch 130/0.42 (HES) impacts treatment decisions in patients after cardiac surgery. Objective The objective of this study was to determine the impact of postoperatively administered HES on renal function and 90-day mortality compared to sole crystalloid administration in patients after elective cardiac surgery. Methods Using electronic health records from a university hospital, confounding-adjusted models analyzed the associations between postoperative HES administration and the occurrence of postoperative acute kidney injury. In addition, 90-day mortality was evaluated. The impact of HES dosage and timing on renal function on trajectories of estimated glomerular filtration rates over the postoperative period was investigated using linear mixed-effects models. Results Overall 1009 patients (45.0%) experienced acute kidney injury. Less acute kidney injury occurred in patients receiving HES compared with patients receiving only crystalloids for fluid resuscitation (43.7% vs 51.2%, p = 0.008). In multivariate acute kidney injury models, HES had a protective association (odds ratio: 0.89; 95% confidence interval 0.82–0.96). Crystalloids were not as protective as HES (odds ratio: 0.98; 95% confidence interval 0.95–1.00). There was no association between HES and 90-day mortality (odds ratio: 1.05; 95% confidence interval 0.88–1.25). Renal function trajectories were dose dependent and biphasic, HES appeared to slow down the late postoperative decline. Conclusions This study showed no association between HES and the postoperative occurrence of acute kidney injury and thus further closes the evidence gap on HES safety in cardiac surgery patients. Although this was a retrospective cohort study, the results indicated that HES might be safely administered to cardiac surgery patients with regard to renal outcomes, especially if it was administered early and dosed appropriately. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40264-021-01116-5.

Objectives In 2017, an in-house best-practice process for medication documentation was developed and implemented to meet the new German legal requirements concerning the management of patient discharge from the hospital. Because this law regulates the common steps of good discharge practices (eg, specification of discharge mediation documentation), we used its implementation to assess the impact of such a measure on the quality of medication documentation and related workflows in clinical routine. Methods By observing workflows and interviewing the affected employees, we analysed the medication workflow processes from admission to discharge of seven representative departments of a large university hospital before and early after implementation of a newly defined best-practice process. To investigate the implementation impact, following measures were determined overall and for five key process steps: quality of medication documentation as measured by predefined criteria, the adherence to the best-practice process (range 0%–100%), workload and potential shifts in responsibilities. Results Already early after implementation, all departments met the legal requirements and the quality of the medication documentation increased from low to high quality in most departments. Mean adherence to the best-practice process was 77% (range 60%–100%) with strictest adherence of 100% in one department. Thereby, the number of process steps and hence, likely also the workload increased in all departments. New tasks were mainly performed by physicians and in one department by pharmacists. Conclusions The new lawful best-practice process led to a higher quality in medication documentation at the cost of a higher workload for physicians, potentially limiting time for other care tasks. Therefore, it could be important to define areas of the medication documentation process in which physicians could be supported by other professions or new tools facilitating accurate medication documentation as the basis of continuity of care.

Background: Fluid management is an everyday challenge in intensive care units worldwide. Data from recent trials suggest that the use of hydroxyethyl starch leads to a higher rate of acute kidney injury and mortality in septic patients. Evidence on the safety of hydroxyethyl starch used in postoperative cardiac surgery patients is lacking Methods: The aim was to determine the impact of postoperatively administered hydroxyethylstarch 130/0.42 on renal function and 90-day mortality compared to with or without balanced crystalloids in patients after elective cardiac surgery. A retrospective cohort analysis was performed including 2245 patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass grafting or, aortic valve replacement, or a combination of both between 2015 - 2019. Acute kidney injury was defined according to the ‘kidney disease improving global outcomes’ criteria. Multivariate logistic regression yielded adjusted associations of postoperative hydroxyethyl starch administration with acute kidney injury during hospital stay and 90-day mortality. Linear mixed-effects models predicted trajectories of estimated glomerular filtration rates over the postoperative period to explore the impact of dosage and timing of hydroxyethyl starch administration.Results: A total of 1009 patients (45.0 %) suffered from acute kidney injury. Significantly less acute kidney injury of any stage occurred in patients receiving hydroxyethyl starch compared to patients receiving only crystalloids for fluid resuscitation (43.7 % vs. 51.2 % p=0.008). In multivariate analysis, the administration of hydroxyethyl starch showed a protective effect (OR 0.89 95% confidence interval (CI) (0.82-0.96)) which was less prominent in patients receiving only crystalloids (OR 0.98, 95% CI (0.95-1.00)). No association between hydroxyethyl starch and 90-day mortality (OR 1.05 95% CI (0.88-1.25)) was detected. Renal function trajectories were dose-dependent and biphasic and hydroxyethyl starch could even slow down the late postoperative decline of kidney function.Conclusion: This study showed no association between hydroxyethyl starch and the postoperative occurrence of acute kidney injury and may add evidence to the discussion about the use of hydroxyethyl starch in cardiac surgery patients. In addition, hydroxyethyl starch administered early after surgery in adequate low doses might even prevent the decline of the kidney function after cardiac surgery.

The present review assessed the evidence on risk factors for the occurrence of adverse health outcomes after discharge (i.e. unplanned readmission or adverse drug event after discharge) that are potentially modifiable by clinical pharmacist interventions. The findings were compared with patient characteristics reported in guidelines that supposedly indicate a high risk of drug-related problems. First, guidelines and risk assessment tools were searched for patient characteristics indicating a high risk of drug-related problems. Second, a systematic PubMed search was conducted to identify risk factors significantly associated with adverse health outcomes after discharge that are potentially modifiable by a clinical pharmacist intervention. After the PubMed search, 37 studies were included, reporting 16 risk factors. Only seven of 34 patient characteristics mentioned in pertinent guidelines corresponded to one of these risk factors. Diabetes mellitus (n = 11), chronic obstructive lung disease (n = 9), obesity (n = 7), smoking (n = 5) and polypharmacy (n = 5) were the risk factors reported most frequently in the studies. Additionally, single studies also found associations of adverse health outcomes with different drug classes {e.g. warfarin [hazard ratio 1.50; odds ratio (OR) 3.52], furosemide [OR 2.25] or high beta-blocker starting doses [OR 3.10]}. Although several modifiable risk factors were found, many patient characteristics supposedly indicating a high risk of drug-related problems were not part of the assessed risk factors in the context of an increased risk of adverse health outcomes after discharge. Therefore, an obligatory set of modifiable patient characteristics should be created and implemented in future studies investigating the risk for adverse health outcomes after discharge.

Background Inadequate drug monitoring of drug therapy after hospital discharge facilitates adverse drug events and preventable hospital readmissions. Objective This study aimed to analyze the structure and content of drug monitoring advices of a representative sample of discharge letters as a basis for future electronic information systems. Methods On 2 days in November 2016, all discharge letters of 3 departments of a university hospital were extracted from the hospital information system. The frequency, content, and structure of drug monitoring advices in discharge letters were investigated and compared with the theoretical monitoring requirements expressed in the corresponding summaries of product characteristics (SmPC). The quality of the drug monitoring advices in the discharge letters was rated with the domains of an adapted systematic instructions for monitoring (SIM) score. Results In total, 154 discharge letters were analyzed containing 1180 brands (240 active pharmaceutical substances), of which 50.42% (595/1180) could theoretically be amended with a monitoring advice according to the SmPC. In reality, 40 discharge letters (26.0%, 40/154) contained a total of 66 monitoring advices for 57 brands (4.83%, 57/1180), comprising 18 different monitoring parameters. Drug monitoring advices only addressed mean 1.9 (SD 0.8) of the 7 domains of the SIM score and frequently did not address reasons for monitoring (86%, 57/66), the timing of monitoring, that is, the start (76%, 50/66), the frequency (94%, 63/66), the stop (95%, 63/66), and how to react (83%, 55/66). Conclusions Drug monitoring advices were mostly absent in discharge letters and a gold standard for appropriate drug monitoring advices was lacking. Hence, more effort should be put in the development of tools that facilitate easy presentation of clinically meaningful drug monitoring advices at the point of care.