药剂师进行术前β-内酰胺过敏评估对围手术期头孢唑林处方的影响。

IF 16.4 1区 化学 Q1 CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY Accounts of Chemical Research Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2023-11-06 DOI:10.1177/08971900231214581
Allison M Hitchcock, Wesley D Kufel, Robert W Seabury, Jeffrey M Steele
{"title":"药剂师进行术前β-内酰胺过敏评估对围手术期头孢唑林处方的影响。","authors":"Allison M Hitchcock, Wesley D Kufel, Robert W Seabury, Jeffrey M Steele","doi":"10.1177/08971900231214581","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Cefazolin is guideline recommended for perioperative prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery. Despite its unique R1 side chain, cefazolin is often avoided in patients with beta-lactam allergy with concern for cross reactivity. <b>Objectives:</b> The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who received cefazolin perioperatively. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of patients with a beta-lactam allergy clarified following the telephone interview and clinical outcomes including acute kidney injury, surgical site infection, <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection, and re-admission at 30 and 90 days. <b>Methods:</b> This single-center, quasi-experimental study evaluated a pilot program in which a pharmacist phoned patients <u>></u> 18 years of age with a scheduled orthopedic surgery and a documented beta-lactam allergy to assess their allergy preoperatively. Recommendations to use cefazolin were based on an algorithm. Patients were divided into pre- and post-intervention cohorts. <b>Results:</b> A total of 832 patients were screened for inclusion with 135 and 66 patients included in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts. No significant difference was identified in the primary outcome. In the post-intervention cohort, 62% had a beta-lactam reaction updated in the electronic medical record. Those with a beta-lactam allergy delabeled or made less severe were numerically more likely to receive cefazolin than those with an unchanged reaction or a reaction made more severe (95.2% vs 68% vs 65%). There were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. <b>Conclusion:</b> A pharmacist-conducted preoperative beta-lactam allergy interview in adult patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery improved beta-lactam allergy documentation but, did not result in increased utilization of cefazolin.</p>","PeriodicalId":1,"journal":{"name":"Accounts of Chemical Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":16.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Impact of a Pharmacist-Conducted Preoperative Beta-Lactam Allergy Assessment on Perioperative Cefazolin Prescribing.\",\"authors\":\"Allison M Hitchcock, Wesley D Kufel, Robert W Seabury, Jeffrey M Steele\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08971900231214581\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Cefazolin is guideline recommended for perioperative prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery. Despite its unique R1 side chain, cefazolin is often avoided in patients with beta-lactam allergy with concern for cross reactivity. <b>Objectives:</b> The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who received cefazolin perioperatively. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of patients with a beta-lactam allergy clarified following the telephone interview and clinical outcomes including acute kidney injury, surgical site infection, <i>Clostridioides difficile</i> infection, and re-admission at 30 and 90 days. <b>Methods:</b> This single-center, quasi-experimental study evaluated a pilot program in which a pharmacist phoned patients <u>></u> 18 years of age with a scheduled orthopedic surgery and a documented beta-lactam allergy to assess their allergy preoperatively. Recommendations to use cefazolin were based on an algorithm. Patients were divided into pre- and post-intervention cohorts. <b>Results:</b> A total of 832 patients were screened for inclusion with 135 and 66 patients included in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts. No significant difference was identified in the primary outcome. In the post-intervention cohort, 62% had a beta-lactam reaction updated in the electronic medical record. Those with a beta-lactam allergy delabeled or made less severe were numerically more likely to receive cefazolin than those with an unchanged reaction or a reaction made more severe (95.2% vs 68% vs 65%). There were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. <b>Conclusion:</b> A pharmacist-conducted preoperative beta-lactam allergy interview in adult patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery improved beta-lactam allergy documentation but, did not result in increased utilization of cefazolin.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":1,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":16.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Accounts of Chemical Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08971900231214581\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"化学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/11/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Accounts of Chemical Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08971900231214581","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"化学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/11/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"CHEMISTRY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:头孢唑林是骨科手术围手术期预防的推荐指南。尽管头孢唑林具有独特的R1侧链,但在β-内酰胺过敏患者中,由于担心交叉反应性,通常避免使用头孢唑林。目的:主要结果是围手术期接受头孢唑林治疗的患者的百分比。次要结果包括电话采访后澄清的β-内酰胺过敏患者的百分比和临床结果,包括急性肾损伤、手术部位感染、艰难梭菌感染以及30天和90天再次入院。方法:这项单中心、准实验性研究评估了一项试点项目,在该项目中,一名药剂师致电18岁以上的患者,对他们进行了预定的骨科手术,并记录了β-内酰胺过敏,以评估他们在术前的过敏情况。建议使用头孢唑林是基于一种算法。患者被分为干预前和干预后两组。结果:共有832名患者被筛选纳入,其中135名和66名患者被纳入干预前和干预后队列。主要结果未发现显著差异。在干预后的队列中,62%的患者出现了电子病历中更新的β-内酰胺反应。与那些反应不变或反应更严重的患者相比,那些对β-内酰胺过敏的患者更容易接受头孢唑林治疗(95.2%对68%对65%)。两组之间的临床结果没有差异。结论:药剂师对接受选择性骨科手术的成年患者进行了术前β-内酰胺过敏访谈,改善了β-内胺过敏记录,但没有增加头孢唑林的使用率。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Impact of a Pharmacist-Conducted Preoperative Beta-Lactam Allergy Assessment on Perioperative Cefazolin Prescribing.

Background: Cefazolin is guideline recommended for perioperative prophylaxis in orthopedic surgery. Despite its unique R1 side chain, cefazolin is often avoided in patients with beta-lactam allergy with concern for cross reactivity. Objectives: The primary outcome was the percentage of patients who received cefazolin perioperatively. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of patients with a beta-lactam allergy clarified following the telephone interview and clinical outcomes including acute kidney injury, surgical site infection, Clostridioides difficile infection, and re-admission at 30 and 90 days. Methods: This single-center, quasi-experimental study evaluated a pilot program in which a pharmacist phoned patients > 18 years of age with a scheduled orthopedic surgery and a documented beta-lactam allergy to assess their allergy preoperatively. Recommendations to use cefazolin were based on an algorithm. Patients were divided into pre- and post-intervention cohorts. Results: A total of 832 patients were screened for inclusion with 135 and 66 patients included in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts. No significant difference was identified in the primary outcome. In the post-intervention cohort, 62% had a beta-lactam reaction updated in the electronic medical record. Those with a beta-lactam allergy delabeled or made less severe were numerically more likely to receive cefazolin than those with an unchanged reaction or a reaction made more severe (95.2% vs 68% vs 65%). There were no differences in clinical outcomes between groups. Conclusion: A pharmacist-conducted preoperative beta-lactam allergy interview in adult patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery improved beta-lactam allergy documentation but, did not result in increased utilization of cefazolin.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Accounts of Chemical Research
Accounts of Chemical Research 化学-化学综合
CiteScore
31.40
自引率
1.10%
发文量
312
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Accounts of Chemical Research presents short, concise and critical articles offering easy-to-read overviews of basic research and applications in all areas of chemistry and biochemistry. These short reviews focus on research from the author’s own laboratory and are designed to teach the reader about a research project. In addition, Accounts of Chemical Research publishes commentaries that give an informed opinion on a current research problem. Special Issues online are devoted to a single topic of unusual activity and significance. Accounts of Chemical Research replaces the traditional article abstract with an article "Conspectus." These entries synopsize the research affording the reader a closer look at the content and significance of an article. Through this provision of a more detailed description of the article contents, the Conspectus enhances the article's discoverability by search engines and the exposure for the research.
期刊最新文献
Intentions to move abroad among medical students: a cross-sectional study to investigate determinants and opinions. The change process questionnaire (CPQ): A psychometric validation. Prevalence and predictors of hand hygiene compliance in clinical, surgical and intensive care unit wards: results of a second cross-sectional study at the Umberto I teaching hospital of Rome. The prevention of medication errors in the home care setting: a scoping review. Differential Costs of Raising Grandchildren on Older Mother-Adult Child Relations in Black and White Families.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1