Transitions of Care—Disposition Planning

2019 ◽  
pp. 293-312
Author(s):  
Kimberly Kopecky ◽  
Pringl Miller

Care transitions are a hot topic in healthcare delivery, research, and policy today because national patient quality and safety data have identified transition of care as a critical time during a patient’s care continuum when both quality and safety are potentially compromised. Poorly executed transitions of care are associated with preventable adverse events and hospital readmissions that are burdensome to patients and their caregivers, correlating to suboptimal outcomes and exorbitant costs. Therefore, reducing both adverse events during a care transition and hospital readmission rates is a matter of clinical and policy priority. High-risk surgical patients are particularly vulnerable to preventable adverse events and readmissions during care transitions because of the complexity of their care needs. To address this problem, governmental and other healthcare organizations are allocating resources and investing in research initiatives to improve, refine, and standardize the transition-of-care process in order to optimize quality of care throughout a patient’s care continuum.

2020 ◽  
Vol 7 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S659-S659
Author(s):  
Angela Talley ◽  
Archie Thurston ◽  
Grayson Moore ◽  
Myriah M Satterfield ◽  
Erika L Manyak ◽  
...  

Abstract Background SPR720 (phosphate pro-drug of SPR719) is a novel aminobenzimidazole bacterial DNA gyrase (GyrB) inhibitor in development for non-tuberculous mycobacterial lung disease (NTM-LD) and pulmonary tuberculosis. SPR719 has broad-spectrum activity versus clinically relevant mycobacteria in vitro and in murine and hollow fiber (HF) infection models. In this first-in-human single ascending dose (SAD) /multiple ascending dose (MAD) study, the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of SPR720/SPR719 were evaluated in healthy volunteers. Methods This was a Phase 1 randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with 7 SAD cohorts (including a food effect cohort) and 5 MAD cohorts. Healthy volunteers (n=8/cohort, 3:1 randomization) received SPR720 or placebo in single oral doses of ranging from 100 mg to 2000 mg or repeat total daily doses ranging from 500 mg to 1500 mg for 7 or 14 days. Safety monitoring and PK sampling occurred throughout the trial. Plasma and urine concentrations of SPR720/SPR719 were measured by validated LC-MS/MS methods. PK parameters were calculated using non-compartmental analysis. Results A total of 96 subjects (including 8 healthy elderly subjects, age ≥ 65 years) were randomized and received study drug. SPR720 was well-tolerated at daily doses up to 1000 mg for up to 14 days. Across SAD/MAD cohorts, the most common adverse events were gastrointestinal (nausea, vomiting and diarrhea) and headache, all of mild or moderate severity and dose dependent. No serious adverse events were reported. Across SAD cohorts, a dose proportional and greater-than-dose proportional increase in SPR719 plasma Cmax and AUC0-24, respectively were observed. SPR720 was rapidly absorbed with a mean SPR719 t1/2 of 2.9-4.5 h. Dosing with food decreased SPR719 plasma AUC by ~20%. No clinically meaningful effect of age on plasma AUC was observed. In the MAD cohorts, SPR719 plasma exposure declined approximately 40% between Day 1 and Day 7, suggesting induction of an elimination pathway. However, plasma AUC0-24 was similar at Days 7 and 14. Conclusion Together with HF pharmacodynamic data, human PK and safety data for SPR720 suggest that predicted therapeutic exposures can be attained with a well-tolerated once-daily dose. Further evaluation in a Phase 2 NTM-LD trial is planned. Disclosures Angela Talley, MD, Spero Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Archie Thurston, Jr., PhD, Spero Therapeutics (Consultant) Grayson Moore, BA, RN, Spero Therapeutics, Inc. (Shareholder, Independent Contractor) Vipul Kumar, PhD, Spero Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Suzanne Stokes, PhD, Spero Therapeutics (Employee, Shareholder) Aaron Dane, MSc, Spero theraputics (Consultant) David Melnick, MD, Spero Therapeutics (Employee)Spero Therapeutics (Employee)


2021 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 175883592110311
Author(s):  
Chiun Hsu ◽  
Lorenza Rimassa ◽  
Hui-Chuan Sun ◽  
Arndt Vogel ◽  
Ahmed O. Kaseb

In light of positive efficacy and safety findings from the IMbrave150 trial of atezolizumab plus bevacizumab, this novel combination has become the preferred first-line standard of care for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Several additional trials are ongoing that combine an immune checkpoint inhibitor with another agent such as a multiple kinase inhibitor or antiangiogenic agent. Therefore, the range of first-line treatment options for unresectable HCC is likely to increase, and healthcare providers need succinct information about the use of such combinations, including their efficacy and key aspects of their safety profiles. Here, we review efficacy and safety data on combination immunotherapies and offer guidance on monitoring and managing adverse events, especially those associated with atezolizumab plus bevacizumab. Because of their underlying liver disease and high likelihood of portal hypertension, patients with unresectable HCC are at particular risk of gastrointestinal bleeding, and this risk may be exacerbated by treatments that include antiangiogenic agents. Healthcare providers also need to be alert to the risks of proteinuria and hypertension, colitis, hepatitis, and reactivation of hepatitis B or C virus infection. They should also be aware of the possibility of rarer but potentially life-threatening adverse events such as pneumonitis and cardiovascular events. Awareness of the risks associated with these therapies and knowledge of adverse event monitoring and management will become increasingly important as the therapeutic range broadens in unresectable HCC.


2002 ◽  
Vol 37 (10) ◽  
pp. 1113-1126 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce A. Generali

“Black-box” warnings report valuable postmarketing safety data about prescription drugs, keeping practitioners informed about potential adverse events, drug interactions, key dosing information, monitoring and administration requirements, and at-risk patient populations. They are especially crucial for newly approved agents. A list of agents with black-box warnings does not currently exist; however Hospital Pharmacy will be publishing comprehensive lists by drug category in this column until November 2002. At that time, a complete list in wall chart form will be released. Hospital Pharmacy will update the data as salient information becomes available.


2021 ◽  
pp. archdischild-2020-321197
Author(s):  
Taco Jan Prins ◽  
Corine Rollema ◽  
Eric van Roon ◽  
Tjalling de Vries

ObjectiveEvaluating the reporting of safety data of medication in paediatric randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in 2017–2018 compared with our earlier study.DesignLiterature search with a systemic appraisal of adverse drug event reporting.Main outcome measuresQuality of reporting of safety data using Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials (CONSORT) and Ioannidis scores in paediatric drug RCTs. The CONSORT score consists of nine recommendations of the CONSORT Group issued to improve the quality of reporting adverse events. The Ioannidis score is based on these advices. We considered a CONSORT score of at least 6 and an Ioannidis score of at least 3 as sufficient.ResultsWe reviewed 100 RCTs published in 2017 and 2018. Ninety-four (94%) articles mentioned adverse events compared with 78% in the earlier study. Fifty-seven per cent used a standardised method for reporting adverse events compared with 34% in our earlier study. In 26 of the articles, the expected adverse events were defined, and 27 articles had a preset standardised scale for adverse events. Of these, 62 articles (62%) had a CONSORT score of 6 or higher compared with 18% in 2010. In the present study, 67% had an Ioannidis score of 3 or higher, whereas in the earlier study this was 29%. Both differences are statistically significant (p<0.05).ConclusionsReporting safety data in paediatric RCTs has improved over the past 10 years. However, there is still room for improvement and for further improvement. Authors and editors should give more attention to methods for collecting, reporting and presenting safety data of RCTs in studies and manuscripts.


Author(s):  
Linda Burkett ◽  
Pamela Moalli ◽  
Mary Ackenbom

Abstract Background Description of energy-based genitourinary non-surgical devices (energy-based devices) safety data is outlined given their rapid adoption. Objectives To describe adverse events (AEs) for energy-based devices in the Manufacturer and User Facility Device Experience (MAUDE) database, and to compare to similar devices and other subspecialty applications. We hypothesized that products with genitourinary applications had similar AEs to dermatologic or general surgery applications. Methods Reed Tech™ Navigator compiled AE reports for all registered energy-based devices. Individual AE reports associated with 1) non-ablative, 2) fractionated, 3) unfractionated 4) radiofrequency, and 5) hybrid laser technologies were categorized. AE characteristics were compared among genitourinary applications (n=39) and other subspecialty applications within the same devices (n=79). Results Eighteen manufacturers were identified, which collectively manufacture 43 products with genitourinary applications. Thirty-nine genitourinary AEs were reported and isolated to 6 manufacturers with 11 products, of which 82% (n=32) were injuries, 15% (n=6) were device malfunction, and 3% (n=1) related to improper maintenance. Local treatment reactions were the most commonly reported injury (62%, n=21). AEs varied by device type with CO2 lasers having more burns and radiofrequency devices having higher rates of sensation loss. When comparing similar technology types, genitourinary energy-based devices had the least AE reports per device in MAUDE database. Conclusions AEs were reported on a quarter of the products currently available, and most were local treatment reactions. The reporting of AEs is equal to that of other subspecialties suggesting similar risk profiles. Improved reporting is needed to fully evaluate the safety of individual energy-based devices.


2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Myung S. Ko ◽  
Vivek A. Rudrapatna ◽  
Patrick Avila ◽  
Uma Mahadevan

AbstractI.Background and AimsLower gastrointestinal endoscopy is the gold standard for the diagnosis and staging of Inflammatory Bowel Disease (IBD). However, there is limited safety data in pregnant populations, resulting in conservative society guidelines and practice patterns favoring diagnostic delay. The aim of this study is to investigate if the performance of flexible sigmoidoscopy is associated with adverse events in pregnant patients with known or suspected IBD.II.MethodsA retrospective cohort study was conducted at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF) between April 2008 and April 2019. Female patients aged between 18 and 48 years who were pregnant at the time of endoscopy were identified. All patient records were reviewed to determine disease, pregnancy course, and lifestyle factors. Two independent reviewers performed the data abstraction. Adverse events were assessed for temporal relation (defined as within 4 weeks) with endoscopy. Any discrepancies in the two reviewers’ data were reviewed by a third independent investigator. Descriptive statistics of data were calculated, and comparison of continuous and categorical data were made using a one-sided Wilcoxon rank-sum test and Fisher’s exact test, respectively.III.ResultsWe report the outcomes of 48 pregnant patients across all trimesters who underwent lower endoscopy for suspected or established IBD. There were no hospitalizations or adverse obstetric events temporally associated with sigmoidoscopy. 78% of patients experienced a change in treatment following sigmoidoscopy. 12% of the patients with known IBD were found to have no endoscopic evidence of disease activity despite symptoms.IV.ConclusionsLower endoscopy in the pregnant patient with known or suspected IBD is low risk and affects therapeutic decision making. It should not be delayed in patients with appropriate indications.


Vaccines ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 6 (4) ◽  
pp. 83 ◽  
Author(s):  
Emily Sellens ◽  
Katrina Bosward ◽  
Susan Willis ◽  
Jane Heller ◽  
Rowland Cobbold ◽  
...  

Q fever is a zoonosis of concern in many countries. Vaccination is the most effective means of prevention, and since 1989, Australia has had a licensed Q fever vaccine, Q-VAX®. This vaccine was also used in the Netherlands in 2011 following the largest recorded Q fever outbreak globally. There is a paucity of available data regarding adverse events following immunisation (AEFI) for young adult females. Such data are important for informing future vaccination recommendations both within Australia and internationally. This study collected Q fever vaccine (Q-VAX®) AEFI data in veterinary and animal science students at Australian universities. Students were enrolled at the time of vaccination and were emailed a link to an online AEFI survey one week later. Of the 60% (499/827) that responded, 85% were female and the median age was 18 years. Local injection site reactions (ISRs) occurred in 98% (95%; CI 96–99%) of respondents, of which 30% (95% CI 24–32%) were severe. Systemic AEFI occurred in 60% (95%; CI 55–64%) of respondents within the seven days following immunisation. Medical attention was sought by 19/499 (3.8%) respondents, of whom one sought treatment at a hospital emergency department. Females were more likely than males to experience any local ISR (odds ratio [OR] 9.3; 95% CI 2.5–33.8; p < 0.001), ISRs of greater severity (OR 2.5; 95% CI 1.5–4.2; p < 0.001), and any systemic AEFI (OR 1.9; 95% CI 1.1–3.1; p = 0.016). These safety data suggest that a high frequency of adverse events following immunisation should be expected in young adults, particularly females. However, the consequences of Q fever disease are potentially far more debilitating.


2019 ◽  
Vol 35 (4) ◽  
pp. 265-273 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark Mintz ◽  
Jesus E. Pina-Garza ◽  
Steven M. Wolf ◽  
Patricia E. McGoldrick ◽  
Sergiusz Józwiak ◽  
...  

Objective: To evaluate the safety and tolerability of adjunctive eslicarbazepine acetate (ESL) in pediatric patients (aged 4-17 years) with refractory focal seizures. Methods: Pooled safety data from patients aged 4-17 years in Study 208 (NCT01527513) and Study 305 (NCT00988156) were analyzed. Both were randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies of ESL as adjunctive treatment in pediatric patients with refractory focal seizures receiving 1 or 2 antiepileptic drugs. Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious adverse events (SAEs), TEAEs leading to discontinuation, and TEAEs of special interest were evaluated. Results: The safety population comprised 362 patients (placebo, n = 160; ESL, n = 202). The overall incidence of TEAEs was similar between the ESL (67.8%) and placebo groups (65.6%), with no clear dose-response relationship. The most frequently reported TEAEs with ESL were headache, somnolence, vomiting, and diplopia. Overall incidences of SAEs and TEAEs leading to discontinuation were higher with ESL versus placebo (9.9% vs 5.0% and 5.9% vs 2.5%, respectively). The majority of SAEs with ESL occurred in Study 305. Two deaths were reported, 1 with ESL (0.5%) due to cluster seizures (resulting in herniation of the cerebellar tonsils) and 1 with placebo (0.6%) due to asphyxia. TEAEs related to allergic reaction, hyponatremia, hypothyroidism, cytopenia, seizure exacerbation, cognitive dysfunction, psychiatric disorders, or suicide occurred infrequently (<9%). Conclusion: Adjunctive ESL was generally well tolerated in children aged 4-17 years with focal seizures. The safety profile of ESL in children was comparable to that observed in adults.


2020 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Chathuri Daluwatte ◽  
Peter Schotland ◽  
David G. Strauss ◽  
Keith K. Burkhart ◽  
Rebecca Racz
Keyword(s):  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document