Search

Objective: The University of Pittsburgh Nephrology Pharmaceutical Care Preceptorship (NPCP) program was conceived to acquaint health system pharmacists with the pharmacotherapeutic management of dialysis patients, enhance the delivery of pharmaceutical care, and improve clinical outcomes through the development of specialized professional skills. A survey designed to determine the impact of the NPCP program was sent to all 145 participants of the program., Methods: The survey, designed to collect demographic information and data about the participants' practice sites, professional activities prior to and after the completion of the program, and markers of disease status, was mailed to all participants in September 1997. The 96 respondents (66.2%) were involved in a wide variety of clinical practices; inpatient management of peritoneal dialysis, hemodialysis, or renal transplant patients were most commonly reported., Results: More than 80% of the participants believed that the educational content of the NPCP program was sufficient to allow them to establish a specialized service for the management of dialysis patients. However, two-thirds would have preferred to have more contact time (an additional 1-2 d) with the preceptorship faculty. The percentage of the pharmacists' time devoted to the provision of pharmaceutical care for dialysis patients almost doubled, from 13.1% to 25.2% (p < 0.001). The components of pharmaceutical care performed by these pharmacists also changed as a result of their completion of the NPCP program. Time devoted to clinical services and the provision of educational programs (inservices) increased significantly, while the time allocated to distributive activities decreased from a mean of 32.4% to 26.4% (almost 20% from baseline). The number of pharmacists who provided some component of pharmaceutical care for ambulatory dialysis patients increased significantly, from 10 to 33, after completion of the program. In the survey given after the preceptorship, almost 70% of these 33 pharmacists self-reported that the mean hematocrit of their ambulatory dialysis patients increased; 45% reported that the epoetin dose was lower. Parenteral iron use was also reported to have increased in 78.8% of the dialysis units, and an increase in serum ferritin and transferrin saturation was observed in 54.5% and 60.6% of the units. respectively. Although far fewer pharmacists (n = 15) initiated a renal osteodystrophy management program, 73.3% of those who did so reported an increase in their patients' compliance with phosphate binder therapy, which was reflected in a drop in serum phosphorous in 40% of the units., Conclusions: The NPCP program resulted in changes in the professional activities of the participants: fewer distributive activities and increased clinical and educational activities. These significant changes were noted in all areas of outpatient care. Participation in the NPCP program enhanced the delivery of pharmaceutical care to dialysis patients and improved the markers of disease status.

This study was undertaken to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of relatively high-dose vancomycin when administered during high-flux hemodialysis using a polysulfone membrane (F-80, Fresenius). Five noninfected, anuric patients received a single dose of 25 mg/kg of vancomycin infused during hemodialysis at a rate of one gram per hour and timed such that the end of the infusion coincided with the end of dialysis. Blood samples were drawn during the infusion, up to six hours after the end of dialysis and then prior to the next three dialysis treatments. Spent dialysate was collected during the infusion. Samples were analyzed using the EMIT assay. The percent of vancomycin lost during the first dialysis session ranged from 39.1 to 55.1% (mean, 45.7+/-6.4). The concentration of vancomycin at 6 hours after hemodialysis ranged from 18.2 to 45.1 mg/L (mean, 29.6+/-10.0 mg/l). Dialysis clearance ranged from 96.1 to 158.1 ml/min (mean, 130.7 +/-30.0 ml/min). One week after dosing, serum concentrations ranged from 8.14 mg/l to 10.1 mg/l (mean, 9.0+/-1.0 mg/l). This study suggests than an initial dose of 25 mg/kg of vancomycin, given during high-flux dialysis, may provide adequate serum concentrations in anuric hemodialysis patients for up to seven days. This dosing scheme reduces inconvenience to the patient and staff, and potentially can reduce nursing costs associated with post-dialysis administration; its cost is minimal. At this point, subsequent dosing is best determined by therapeutic drug monitoring.

Aminoguanidine is an investigational agent that may slow or prevent many diabetes-related complications. Since the elimination of aminoguanidine is dependent on renal function, its pharmacokinetics was investigated in eight chronic renal failure patients maintained on hemodialysis. Each patient received 300 mg of aminoguanidine hydrochloride during both an interdialytic and an intradialytic period. During the interdialytic period, the maximum aminoguanidine concentration (Cmax) and time to reach Cmax was 4.5 micrograms/mL and 1.5 hours, respectively. The terminal elimination half-life in these patients was prolonged (37.9 hours). The renal clearance was 2.1 mL/min. Only 8.7% of the administered dose was recovered unchanged in the urine, which is markedly reduced from what is recovered in urine in subjects with normal renal function. There was a positive correlation between the renal clearance of aminoguanidine and the patients' residual renal function (P < 0.05). During hemodialysis, the half-life of aminoguanidine was shortened to 3.9 hours. The hemodialysis clearance of aminoguanidine was 203.6 mL/min. After cessation of hemodialysis, a significant rebound in plasma aminoguanidine concentrations (mean, 39%) was observed. Thus, the dose of aminoguanidine hydrochloride will need to be significantly reduced in patients with end-stage renal disease. Given the interdialytic and intradialytic pharmacokinetics of aminoguanidine, three times weekly dosing after each hemodialysis session is suggested.

Background: Hemodialysis (HD) patients are on multiple medications, see many prescribers and have many hospitalizations which put them at risk for medication record discrepancies and medication related problems (MRP). Being able to effectively identify and reconcile these medication issues is crucial in reducing hospitalizations, morbidities, and mortalities. The care of the hemodialysis patients can be enhanced by incorporating a pharmacist into the interprofessional team. There is little data in the literature on medication record discrepancies and MRP’s in dialysis patients. Objective: The objectives of this research were to determine the types of medication discrepancies and MRPs in dialysis patients and if recommendations for changes based on these findings were accepted by providers. Methods: Patients were asked to bring medications to the dialysis unit for review. Discrepancy and MRP recommendations were communicated to the unit staff via written progress notes. A follow-up was performed an average of 33 days later to determine if the recommendations were accepted. Results: Overall, in 93 unique patients, 376 discrepancies (3.1 per patient) and 64 MRPs (0.5 per patient) were identified. The most common type of discrepancy and MRP was drug omission and indication without drug, respectively. Of the total 440 interventions, 77% were ultimately accepted. Discrepancies were more likely to be accepted as compared to MRPs (85% vs. 27%, respectively). Conclusion: Medication record discrepancies and MRPs are common in dialysis patients. Recommendations related to discrepancies were more likely to be accepted by the providers as compared to MRPs. Medication records became inaccurate within 12 months. A pharmacy-based medication reconciliation and review program may have an important impact on the care of hemodialysis patients.