The development and use of concentrated insulins have increased in recent years. This can pose unique challenges when transitioning to a non-concentrated insulin during an inpatient admission. There is no clear consensus on the recommended interchange of the various concentrated insulins in the inpatient setting, with suggestions ranging from implementing a 1:1 unit dose conversion, a minimum 20% dose reduction or selecting an approach based on the total daily dose of the concentrated insulin. In a retrospective cohort analysis at a single health system, a greater number of hypoglycemic events occurred when implementing a 1:1 unit conversion of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (iGlar300) to insulin detemir 100 units/mL (iDet100) compared to the same conversion from insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar100) to iDet100. This prompted identification of a standardized approach that would improve patient safety while also being operationally feasible at a multi-hospital network. The solution of implementing a minimum 20% dose reduction successfully improved hypoglycemia rates upon transitioning from iGlar300 to iDet100, though many logistical challenges were faced. Although iDet100 is being phased off the market, adhering to this minimum 20% dose reduction is the recommended approach when transitioning from iGlar300 to iGlar100, and this challenge persists as a relevant issue. Ensuring health systems are equipped to implement dose reductions when transitioning from concentrated basal insulins to non-concentrated basal insulin counterparts is paramount for maintaining patient safety. This paper will discuss the limited evidence available supporting optimal dosing when transitioning iGlar300 and insulin degludec 200 units/mL (iDeg200) to non-concentrated basal insulins and serve as a “how to” implementation guide for other health systems, based on one health system's approach in navigating this emerging patient safety issue.
{"title":"Ensuring patient safety when managing concentrated insulin glargine and insulin degludec at hospital admission","authors":"Denise Kelley Pharm.D., Janci Addison Pharm.D., Kristin Janzen Pharm.D., Steven Wulfe Pharm.D.","doi":"10.1002/jac5.1997","DOIUrl":"10.1002/jac5.1997","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The development and use of concentrated insulins have increased in recent years. This can pose unique challenges when transitioning to a non-concentrated insulin during an inpatient admission. There is no clear consensus on the recommended interchange of the various concentrated insulins in the inpatient setting, with suggestions ranging from implementing a 1:1 unit dose conversion, a minimum 20% dose reduction or selecting an approach based on the total daily dose of the concentrated insulin. In a retrospective cohort analysis at a single health system, a greater number of hypoglycemic events occurred when implementing a 1:1 unit conversion of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (iGlar300) to insulin detemir 100 units/mL (iDet100) compared to the same conversion from insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar100) to iDet100. This prompted identification of a standardized approach that would improve patient safety while also being operationally feasible at a multi-hospital network. The solution of implementing a minimum 20% dose reduction successfully improved hypoglycemia rates upon transitioning from iGlar300 to iDet100, though many logistical challenges were faced. Although iDet100 is being phased off the market, adhering to this minimum 20% dose reduction is the recommended approach when transitioning from iGlar300 to iGlar100, and this challenge persists as a relevant issue. Ensuring health systems are equipped to implement dose reductions when transitioning from concentrated basal insulins to non-concentrated basal insulin counterparts is paramount for maintaining patient safety. This paper will discuss the limited evidence available supporting optimal dosing when transitioning iGlar300 and insulin degludec 200 units/mL (iDeg200) to non-concentrated basal insulins and serve as a “how to” implementation guide for other health systems, based on one health system's approach in navigating this emerging patient safety issue.</p>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"7 8","pages":"858-866"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"141712405","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}
Sarah Temi Sofeso Pharm.D., Emily Plasencia Pharm.D., Ana A. Safri Pharm.D., MBA, Cedric S. White Pharm.D., Natalija Mead Farrell Pharm.D., Jessica L. Corio Pharm.D., Danielle Kebadjian Lindale Pharm.D., Madeline Palmer M.D., Bryan J. Gendron Pharm.D.
Emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists provide high-quality patient care in a fast-paced environment by optimizing pharmacotherapy regimens and reducing medication errors. Current literature demonstrates higher rates of medication errors with antibiotics compared with other medication classes. The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to reduce medication errors by 25% from baseline for antibiotic discharge prescriptions for urinary tract infections (UTIs). This QI initiative utilized the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Model for Improvement to implement a UTI stewardship intervention and prospective pharmacist review of discharge prescriptions. Patients discharged from the adult ED with an electronic prescription for UTI treatment with select antibiotics were included. The primary outcome metric was the percent of medication errors, defined as a composite of appropriate antibiotic agent, dose, frequency, and treatment duration based on our local treatment algorithm. The balancing metric was time spent per order reviewed. Data over time were assessed using statistical process control charts. A total of 534 antibiotic prescriptions were reviewed from January 9, 2022 to May 31, 2023. The most common indication was cystitis (70%), followed by pyelonephritis (17.4%) and asymptomatic bacteriuria (12.5%). Composite error rate decreased from 64.2% to 5%. Duration of therapy was the most common baseline error and was reduced from 45.3% to 11.6%. Errors in agent, dose and frequency decreased from 19.7% to 3.5%, 10.3% to 0.8% and from 5.7% to 0%, respectively. The aim of this QI initiative was achieved through a series of interventions, including prospective review of discharge antibiotics for UTIs by EM pharmacists, which reduced medication errors. This project demonstrates EM pharmacists have a positive impact in optimization of antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of UTIs.
{"title":"Pharmacist review of discharge antibiotics for urinary tract infections in the emergency department","authors":"Sarah Temi Sofeso Pharm.D., Emily Plasencia Pharm.D., Ana A. Safri Pharm.D., MBA, Cedric S. White Pharm.D., Natalija Mead Farrell Pharm.D., Jessica L. Corio Pharm.D., Danielle Kebadjian Lindale Pharm.D., Madeline Palmer M.D., Bryan J. Gendron Pharm.D.","doi":"10.1002/jac5.2009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.2009","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Emergency medicine (EM) pharmacists provide high-quality patient care in a fast-paced environment by optimizing pharmacotherapy regimens and reducing medication errors. Current literature demonstrates higher rates of medication errors with antibiotics compared with other medication classes. The aim of this quality improvement (QI) project was to reduce medication errors by 25% from baseline for antibiotic discharge prescriptions for urinary tract infections (UTIs). This QI initiative utilized the Institute for Healthcare Improvement Model for Improvement to implement a UTI stewardship intervention and prospective pharmacist review of discharge prescriptions. Patients discharged from the adult ED with an electronic prescription for UTI treatment with select antibiotics were included. The primary outcome metric was the percent of medication errors, defined as a composite of appropriate antibiotic agent, dose, frequency, and treatment duration based on our local treatment algorithm. The balancing metric was time spent per order reviewed. Data over time were assessed using statistical process control charts. A total of 534 antibiotic prescriptions were reviewed from January 9, 2022 to May 31, 2023. The most common indication was cystitis (70%), followed by pyelonephritis (17.4%) and asymptomatic bacteriuria (12.5%). Composite error rate decreased from 64.2% to 5%. Duration of therapy was the most common baseline error and was reduced from 45.3% to 11.6%. Errors in agent, dose and frequency decreased from 19.7% to 3.5%, 10.3% to 0.8% and from 5.7% to 0%, respectively. The aim of this QI initiative was achieved through a series of interventions, including prospective review of discharge antibiotics for UTIs by EM pharmacists, which reduced medication errors. This project demonstrates EM pharmacists have a positive impact in optimization of antimicrobial therapy for the treatment of UTIs.</p>","PeriodicalId":73966,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy : JACCP","volume":"7 10","pages":"996-1003"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3,"publicationDate":"2024-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"142430286","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}