Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.343
S. Rotea, T. Calleja, F. Busto, M. Mateos, E. Fernández, I. Martín
{"title":"5PSQ-224 Clinical experience of pembrolizumab with axitinib in renal cell carcinoma","authors":"S. Rotea, T. Calleja, F. Busto, M. Mateos, E. Fernández, I. Martín","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.343","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.343","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80781277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.356
S. Filkova, O. Krstic
Background and importance Recent results showed that most European citizens want the European Union (EU) to provide more financial support to overcome the impact of the pandemic. Public health tops the priority list followed by economic recovery. Findings revealed that more than 75% of Europeans on average have heard about the measures taken by the EU against COVID-19 and a rising number of respondents are now satisfied with these measures. Simultaneously, a majority is nevertheless still not satisfied with the solidarity shown among EU member states during the crisis. What is the opinion of a non-EU country? Aim and objectives To explore and evaluate the national perception of a non-member state about the EU response to the COVID-19 pandemic, EU competences and budget, satisfaction with EU measures, solidarity among member and non-member states and personal circumstances and financial consequences of COVID-19. A survey was conducted (August–September 2020) in 164 randomly selected participants, aged 18–64 years. Material and methods The questionnaire consisted of eight adapted questions from the European Parliament specific survey ‘Public opinion in the EU in time of coronavirus crisis 2’. The interviews were conducted by telephone. Results Around 63% of respondents had heard that the EU proposed various measures to fight the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, but more than half (57%) did not know what they were. Of those who were familiar with them, 40% reported satisfaction. Most respondents (72%) were not satisfied with the solidarity among EU and non-EU member states. Asked about the policy fields where this enlarged budget should be spent, public health was a priority (65%), followed by economic recovery and new opportunities for businesses (53%), and employment and social affairs (41%). A clear majority (79%) supported a larger budget to fight COVID-19. 75% of respondents reported experiencing personal financial difficulties. The feelings that best described their current emotional state were uncertainty (63%), helplessness (32%), fear (23%), hope (43%) and confidence (28%). Conclusion and relevance Public opinion in the time of COVID-19 did not differ significantly from the opinion of European citizens. However, most respondents were not satisfied with the solidarity among EU and non-EU member states. Personal financial difficulties remain significant. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest
{"title":"6ER-032 Public opinion and personal situation in times of the COVID-19 pandemic","authors":"S. Filkova, O. Krstic","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.356","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.356","url":null,"abstract":"Background and importance Recent results showed that most European citizens want the European Union (EU) to provide more financial support to overcome the impact of the pandemic. Public health tops the priority list followed by economic recovery. Findings revealed that more than 75% of Europeans on average have heard about the measures taken by the EU against COVID-19 and a rising number of respondents are now satisfied with these measures. Simultaneously, a majority is nevertheless still not satisfied with the solidarity shown among EU member states during the crisis. What is the opinion of a non-EU country? Aim and objectives To explore and evaluate the national perception of a non-member state about the EU response to the COVID-19 pandemic, EU competences and budget, satisfaction with EU measures, solidarity among member and non-member states and personal circumstances and financial consequences of COVID-19. A survey was conducted (August–September 2020) in 164 randomly selected participants, aged 18–64 years. Material and methods The questionnaire consisted of eight adapted questions from the European Parliament specific survey ‘Public opinion in the EU in time of coronavirus crisis 2’. The interviews were conducted by telephone. Results Around 63% of respondents had heard that the EU proposed various measures to fight the consequences of the COVID-19 pandemic, but more than half (57%) did not know what they were. Of those who were familiar with them, 40% reported satisfaction. Most respondents (72%) were not satisfied with the solidarity among EU and non-EU member states. Asked about the policy fields where this enlarged budget should be spent, public health was a priority (65%), followed by economic recovery and new opportunities for businesses (53%), and employment and social affairs (41%). A clear majority (79%) supported a larger budget to fight COVID-19. 75% of respondents reported experiencing personal financial difficulties. The feelings that best described their current emotional state were uncertainty (63%), helplessness (32%), fear (23%), hope (43%) and confidence (28%). Conclusion and relevance Public opinion in the time of COVID-19 did not differ significantly from the opinion of European citizens. However, most respondents were not satisfied with the solidarity among EU and non-EU member states. Personal financial difficulties remain significant. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"80795305","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.287
C. Séréni, L. Maljean, F. Morey, S. Dupire, B. Mauguen
Background and importance Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody now extensively used for multiple myeloma. Due to the high risk of infusion related reactions (IRRs), it is administered over a period of 4 hours. The French Myeloma Intergroup, as part of COVID-19, has authorised infusions of daratumumab over 1.5 hours in clinical trials (CT) based on studies showing a safety profile comparable with long infusions. Aim and objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate IRRs associated with rapid injection of daratumumab in a real life population. Material and methods From June to July 2020, after medical approval, patients who were given two or more doses of daratumumab with standard infusion rates were authorised to receive ‘rapid dara’ (infusion 1.5 hours). A group was organised by the pharmacy for the nursing team to present the new infusion rate and to remind them of the risks of IRRs. Patient characteristics (age, sex, comorbidities), previous daratumumab infusions (including if patients experienced IRRs) and type of protocols were collected. IRRs were directly recorded in validation administration software. Results 23 patients received ‘rapid dara’ during the study period and no IRRs were reported. Mean age was 69.5 years; 5/23 patients were between 45 and 65 years old, 13/23 between 65 and 75 years old and 5/23 were >75 years old. 15/23 were women and 8/23 were men. 15/23 patients had at least one comorbidity; 13/23 had at least one cardiovascular comorbidity, 3/23 had one pneumological comorbidity and 6/23 had renal impairment. In terms of treatment, 21/23 patients were receiving multidrug therapy (compared with 2/23 on daratumumab monotherapy). 6/23 had previously received between 3 and 10 INJ, 14/23 between 11 and 20 INJ and 3/23 had received >20 INJ. Conclusion and relevance Our findings suggest that in real life patients, ‘rapid dara’ is safe in terms of IRRs. These results are in agreement with those presented in previous CT. In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, decreased infusion time allows a reduction in contact time, decreased hospitalisations, and optimises nurse timing. Rapid daratumumab appears to be a safe and economic alternative while waiting for subcutaneous daratumumab. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest
{"title":"5PSQ-168 Interest and implementation of rapid daratumumab infusion during the health crisis","authors":"C. Séréni, L. Maljean, F. Morey, S. Dupire, B. Mauguen","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.287","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.287","url":null,"abstract":"Background and importance Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody now extensively used for multiple myeloma. Due to the high risk of infusion related reactions (IRRs), it is administered over a period of 4 hours. The French Myeloma Intergroup, as part of COVID-19, has authorised infusions of daratumumab over 1.5 hours in clinical trials (CT) based on studies showing a safety profile comparable with long infusions. Aim and objectives The aim of this study was to evaluate IRRs associated with rapid injection of daratumumab in a real life population. Material and methods From June to July 2020, after medical approval, patients who were given two or more doses of daratumumab with standard infusion rates were authorised to receive ‘rapid dara’ (infusion 1.5 hours). A group was organised by the pharmacy for the nursing team to present the new infusion rate and to remind them of the risks of IRRs. Patient characteristics (age, sex, comorbidities), previous daratumumab infusions (including if patients experienced IRRs) and type of protocols were collected. IRRs were directly recorded in validation administration software. Results 23 patients received ‘rapid dara’ during the study period and no IRRs were reported. Mean age was 69.5 years; 5/23 patients were between 45 and 65 years old, 13/23 between 65 and 75 years old and 5/23 were >75 years old. 15/23 were women and 8/23 were men. 15/23 patients had at least one comorbidity; 13/23 had at least one cardiovascular comorbidity, 3/23 had one pneumological comorbidity and 6/23 had renal impairment. In terms of treatment, 21/23 patients were receiving multidrug therapy (compared with 2/23 on daratumumab monotherapy). 6/23 had previously received between 3 and 10 INJ, 14/23 between 11 and 20 INJ and 3/23 had received >20 INJ. Conclusion and relevance Our findings suggest that in real life patients, ‘rapid dara’ is safe in terms of IRRs. These results are in agreement with those presented in previous CT. In the context of the COVID-19 crisis, decreased infusion time allows a reduction in contact time, decreased hospitalisations, and optimises nurse timing. Rapid daratumumab appears to be a safe and economic alternative while waiting for subcutaneous daratumumab. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"86157372","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.330
M. Jeske, C. Gehmacher, P. Salchner, M. Zeiler
{"title":"5PSQ-211 Medication errors relating to similar or misleading manufacturer specific drug packaging and labelling","authors":"M. Jeske, C. Gehmacher, P. Salchner, M. Zeiler","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.330","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.330","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73198334","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.8
J. Lemonnier, D. Talon
{"title":"1ISG-027 Carbon footprint of a sterilisation unit","authors":"J. Lemonnier, D. Talon","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.8","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.8","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"76430788","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.216
J. Barceló-Vidal, N. Carballo, M. D. Antonio-Cuscó, X. Fernández-Sala, D. Echeverría-Esnal, P. Acin, C. López-Mula, L. Comella-Anaya, E. González-Colominas, S. Luque, O. Ferrández
Background and importance Drug related problems (DRP) are common among hospitalised patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of inpatients increased and the pattern of drug use was varied which could lead to a higher number of potential DRP. Aim and objectives To describe DRP in patients admitted to COVID-19 wards during the COVID-19 pandemic peak. Material and methods A retrospective observational study was performed in a tertiary university hospital from 21 March to 30 April 2020. Patients included were those admitted to a COVID-19 ward and presenting a DRP (excluding emergency department and critical care units). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE) operates for all hospital beds. Medical prescriptions were revised daily by clinical pharmacists. When a potential DRP was detected, an annotation with a recommendation was made in the patient’s medical record. DRP were classified according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification. Data collected were demographic, the drug class involved (anatomical chemical therapeutic (ATC)), DRP detected and degree of recommendation acceptance. Results Total patients with DRP: 291 (23.3%). Identified DRP: 393 (1.4 DRP/patient). 58.3% were men and median age was 63 (15.7) years. Conclusion and relevance Almost 25% of all patients had a DRP, presenting an incidence of 1.4 DRP/patient, higher than reported in previous series. 83% of evaluable recommendations were accepted. One- third of the recommendations were derived from a wrong dosage, and 15% from drug interactions. Hydroxychloroquine was the most frequently involved drug, probably because of the limited experience and wide spectrum of interactions, followed by antimicrobials such as ceftriaxone and azithromycin, used widely in respiratory tract infections. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest
{"title":"4CPS-384 Potential drug related problems in the time of COVID-19","authors":"J. Barceló-Vidal, N. Carballo, M. D. Antonio-Cuscó, X. Fernández-Sala, D. Echeverría-Esnal, P. Acin, C. López-Mula, L. Comella-Anaya, E. González-Colominas, S. Luque, O. Ferrández","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.216","url":null,"abstract":"Background and importance Drug related problems (DRP) are common among hospitalised patients. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the number of inpatients increased and the pattern of drug use was varied which could lead to a higher number of potential DRP. Aim and objectives To describe DRP in patients admitted to COVID-19 wards during the COVID-19 pandemic peak. Material and methods A retrospective observational study was performed in a tertiary university hospital from 21 March to 30 April 2020. Patients included were those admitted to a COVID-19 ward and presenting a DRP (excluding emergency department and critical care units). Computerised physician order entry (CPOE) operates for all hospital beds. Medical prescriptions were revised daily by clinical pharmacists. When a potential DRP was detected, an annotation with a recommendation was made in the patient’s medical record. DRP were classified according to the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification. Data collected were demographic, the drug class involved (anatomical chemical therapeutic (ATC)), DRP detected and degree of recommendation acceptance. Results Total patients with DRP: 291 (23.3%). Identified DRP: 393 (1.4 DRP/patient). 58.3% were men and median age was 63 (15.7) years. Conclusion and relevance Almost 25% of all patients had a DRP, presenting an incidence of 1.4 DRP/patient, higher than reported in previous series. 83% of evaluable recommendations were accepted. One- third of the recommendations were derived from a wrong dosage, and 15% from drug interactions. Hydroxychloroquine was the most frequently involved drug, probably because of the limited experience and wide spectrum of interactions, followed by antimicrobials such as ceftriaxone and azithromycin, used widely in respiratory tract infections. References and/or acknowledgements Conflict of interest No conflict of interest","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"77887058","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.87
A. Martínez, R. H. Lacunza, A. P. Rello, L. C. Poderoso, M. Moreno, A. Pérez, J. P. Pascual, Abad Sazatornil
{"title":"4CPS-255 Clinical experience of ceftaroline use in a third level hospital","authors":"A. Martínez, R. H. Lacunza, A. P. Rello, L. C. Poderoso, M. Moreno, A. Pérez, J. P. Pascual, Abad Sazatornil","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.87","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.87","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81710505","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.263
B De La Calle Riaguas, P. G. Espinosa, FJ Juliá Luna, Mdp Briceño Casado, M. D. Cantero
{"title":"5PSQ-144 Pharmacotherapy optimisation in patients over 50 years of age with HIV infection: first steps","authors":"B De La Calle Riaguas, P. G. Espinosa, FJ Juliá Luna, Mdp Briceño Casado, M. D. Cantero","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.263","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.263","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81751366","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.39
J. Dulon, A. Jordy, U. Carrere, E. Debrosse, L. Godreau, J. Arcizet, M. Laplace, B. Dalifard, B. L. Franc
{"title":"3PC-064 A multicentre study comparing chemotherapy preparations using digital video monitoring","authors":"J. Dulon, A. Jordy, U. Carrere, E. Debrosse, L. Godreau, J. Arcizet, M. Laplace, B. Dalifard, B. L. Franc","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.39","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.39","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"79104431","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2021-03-01DOI: 10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.209
C. Faure, P. Loriod, AC Maes, P. Marguet, M. Kroemer, A. Rumpler, E. Daguindau, S. Limat
Background and importance Nutritional management in the intensive care unit (ICU) of patients with COVID-19 can influence their recovery. Several guides about nutritional support have appeared in the past few months Aim and objectives To assess the appropriateness of nutritional management for COVID-19 patients in the ICU requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) through compliance with the recommendations of the Spanish Society for Intensive Care (SEMICYUC), the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN). Material and methods An observational retrospective study was conducted between 2 March and 13 May 2020. Patient data were taken from the clinical records. Demographic variables were age and sex; clinical variables were days until the start of artificial nutrition (AN), duration and type of enteral (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN), body mass index (BMI), calorie intake/kg/day, protein/kg/day on the first and fifth days, increase in markers of hepatic cholestasis when duration of NP was >14 days, length of ICU stay and death. Results 41 patients were included, 75.6%(n=31) men, and average age was 59.6±12,2 years. Median time to start of AN was 1 (0–6) day. 34.1% (n=14) of patients were obese, of whom 21% (n=3) were morbidly obese (average BMI 44.86±6.4). Average total kcal/kg/day and protein/kg/day on the first and fifth days of nutrition were 21.9±7.5 kcal/kg/day and 1.35±0.6 g protein/kg/day and 23.5±9.8 kcal/kg/day and 1.9±3.2 g protein/kg/day, respectively. Only 17% (n=7) started AN with EN, which was hypercaloric/hyperproteic (n=3) and normocaloric/normoproteic (n=4). At any time during hospital stay, 97.5% of patients had PN with a median of 14.5 (2–52) days. 20 people had PN >14 days. Alkaline phosphatase remained increased for 11 of them with a median of 13 (3–38) days. Direct bilirubin was elevated in all patients. 34 patients died and 26 remained on PN until the day they died. Conclusion and relevance During the first day, AN accomplished the recommendations (20 kcal/kg/day and 1.2–1.3 g protein/kg/day). On the fifth day, total kilocalories did not achieve the recommended values (25 kcal/kg/day), although protein/kg/day was higher than the guidelines (1.5 kcal/kg/ day). The reason might be the increasing protein request of these patients. High doses of muscle relaxants could prevent proper functionality of digestive tube and low use of EN. It may be important to discuss the suitability of maintenance of AN for patients with a short life expectancy.
{"title":"4CPS-377 Appropriateness of nutritional support for patients with invasive mechanical ventilation with COVID-19 disease requiring intensive care","authors":"C. Faure, P. Loriod, AC Maes, P. Marguet, M. Kroemer, A. Rumpler, E. Daguindau, S. Limat","doi":"10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.209","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1136/EJHPHARM-2021-EAHPCONF.209","url":null,"abstract":"Background and importance Nutritional management in the intensive care unit (ICU) of patients with COVID-19 can influence their recovery. Several guides about nutritional support have appeared in the past few months Aim and objectives To assess the appropriateness of nutritional management for COVID-19 patients in the ICU requiring invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) through compliance with the recommendations of the Spanish Society for Intensive Care (SEMICYUC), the European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) and the American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (ASPEN). Material and methods An observational retrospective study was conducted between 2 March and 13 May 2020. Patient data were taken from the clinical records. Demographic variables were age and sex; clinical variables were days until the start of artificial nutrition (AN), duration and type of enteral (EN) or parenteral nutrition (PN), body mass index (BMI), calorie intake/kg/day, protein/kg/day on the first and fifth days, increase in markers of hepatic cholestasis when duration of NP was >14 days, length of ICU stay and death. Results 41 patients were included, 75.6%(n=31) men, and average age was 59.6±12,2 years. Median time to start of AN was 1 (0–6) day. 34.1% (n=14) of patients were obese, of whom 21% (n=3) were morbidly obese (average BMI 44.86±6.4). Average total kcal/kg/day and protein/kg/day on the first and fifth days of nutrition were 21.9±7.5 kcal/kg/day and 1.35±0.6 g protein/kg/day and 23.5±9.8 kcal/kg/day and 1.9±3.2 g protein/kg/day, respectively. Only 17% (n=7) started AN with EN, which was hypercaloric/hyperproteic (n=3) and normocaloric/normoproteic (n=4). At any time during hospital stay, 97.5% of patients had PN with a median of 14.5 (2–52) days. 20 people had PN >14 days. Alkaline phosphatase remained increased for 11 of them with a median of 13 (3–38) days. Direct bilirubin was elevated in all patients. 34 patients died and 26 remained on PN until the day they died. Conclusion and relevance During the first day, AN accomplished the recommendations (20 kcal/kg/day and 1.2–1.3 g protein/kg/day). On the fifth day, total kilocalories did not achieve the recommended values (25 kcal/kg/day), although protein/kg/day was higher than the guidelines (1.5 kcal/kg/ day). The reason might be the increasing protein request of these patients. High doses of muscle relaxants could prevent proper functionality of digestive tube and low use of EN. It may be important to discuss the suitability of maintenance of AN for patients with a short life expectancy.","PeriodicalId":11991,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Hospital Pharmacy: Science and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"85263202","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：