Search

Background: The optimum regimen of epoetin alfa for prevention of allogeneic blood transfusion is unknown.Objective: To determine whether a modified regimen of epoetin alfa reduces allogeneic blood transfusion in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty.Design: Randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial comparing two modified dose regimens of epoetin alfa with placebo.Setting: 13 teaching hospitals and 4 community hospitals in Canada.Patients: 201 patients undergoing primary hip arthroplasty who had a hemoglobin concentration of 98 to 137 g/L and did not predonate blood.Intervention: Patients were assigned in a 3:5:5 ratio to receive four weekly doses of epoetin alfa, 40 000 U (high-dose; n = 44) or 20 000 U (low-dose; n = 79), or placebo (n = 78), starting 4 weeks before surgery. All patients received oral iron supplementation, 450 mg/d, for 42 or more days before surgery.Measurements: The primary end point was allogeneic transfusion. Secondary end points were thromboembolic events and change in reticulocyte count and hemoglobin concentration.Results: Both modified epoetin alfa regimens significantly reduced the need for allogeneic transfusion: Five (11.4%) patients in the high-dose group (P = 0.001) and 18 (22. 8%) patients in the low-dose group (P = 0.003) had transfusion, compared with 35 (44.9%) patients in the placebo group. The hematologic response was substantial in patients who received epoetin alfa. In the high-dose group, low-dose group, and placebo group, the preoperative increase in reticulocyte count was 58.8, 37. 0 and 1.8 x 10(9) cells/L (P < 0.001), respectively, and the increase in hemoglobin concentration was 19.5, 17.2, and 1.2 g/L (P < 0.001). The incidence of thromboembolic events did not differ among groups.Conclusions: Both modified epoetin alfa regimens were effective compared with placebo in reducing allogeneic transfusion in patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. Patients who received high-dose epoetin alfa had the lowest transfusion rate. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Community-acquired pneumonia is a common disease with a large economic burden. We assessed clinical practices and outcomes among patients with community-acquired pneumonia admitted to Canadian hospitals., Methods: A total of 20 hospitals (11 teaching and 9 community) participated. Data from the charts of adults admitted during November 1996, January 1997 and March 1997 were reviewed to determine length of stay (LOS), admission to an intensive care unit and 30-day in-hospital mortality. Multivariate analyses examined sources of variability in LOS. The type and duration of antibiotic therapy and the proportion of patients who were treated according to clinical practice guidelines were determined., Results: A total of 858 eligible patients were identified; their mean age was 69.4 (standard deviation 17.7) years. The overall median LOS was 7.0 days (interquartile range [IQR] 4.0-11.0 days); the median LOS ranged from 5.0 to 9.0 days across hospitals (IQR 6.0-7.8 days). Only 22% of the variability in LOS could be explained by known factors (disease severity 12%; presence of chronic obstructive lung disease or bacterial cause for the pneumonia 2%; hospital site 7%). The overall 30-day mortality was 14.1% (95% confidence interval [CI] 11.8%-16.6%); 13.6% of the patients were admitted to an intensive care unit (95% CI 11.4%-16.1%). The median duration of intravenous antibiotic therapy was 5 days (range 3.0-6.5 days across hospitals). Although 79.8% of patients received treatment according to clinical practice guidelines, the rate of compliance with the guidelines ranged from 47.9% to 100% across hospitals., Interpretation: Considerable heterogeneity exists in the management of community-acquired pneumonia at Canadian hospitals, the causes of which are poorly understood.

Context: Large variations exist among hospitals in the use of treatment resources for community-acquired pneumonia (CAP). Lack of a common approach to the diagnosis and treatment of CAP has been cited as an explanation for these variations., Objective: To determine if use of a critical pathway improves the efficiency of treatment for CAP without compromising the well-being of patients., Design: Multicenter controlled clinical trial with cluster randomization and up to 6 weeks of follow-up., Setting: Nineteen teaching and community hospitals in Canada., Patients: A total of 1743 patients with CAP presenting to the emergency department at 1 of the participating institutions between January 1 and July 31, 1998., Intervention: Hospitals were assigned to continue conventional management (n = 10) or implement the critical pathway (n = 9), which consisted of a clinical prediction rule to guide the admission decision, levofloxacin therapy, and practice guidelines., Main Outcome Measures: Effectiveness of the critical pathway, as measured by health-related quality of life on the Short-Form 36 Physical Component Summary (SF-36 PCS) scale at 6 weeks; and resource utilization, as measured by the number of bed days per patient managed (BDPM)., Results: Quality of life and the occurrence of complications, readmission, and mortality were not different for the 2 strategies; the 1-sided 95% confidence limit of the between-group difference in the SF-36 PCS change score was 2.4 points, which was within a predefined 3-point boundary for equivalence. Pathway use was associated with a 1.7-day reduction in BDPM (4.4 vs 6.1 days; P = .04) and an 18% decrease in the admission of low-risk patients (31% vs 49%; P = .01). Although inpatients at critical pathway hospitals had more severe disease, they required 1.7 fewer days of intravenous therapy (4.6 vs 6.3 days; P = .01) and were more likely to receive treatment with a single class of antibiotic (64% vs 27%; P<.001)., Conclusion: In this study, implementation of a critical pathway reduced the use of institutional resources without causing adverse effects on the well-being of patients.