Impact of Anticipatory Batching of Pharmacy Compounded Sterile Products on Time to Nurse Administration

2021 ◽  
pp. 089719002110271
Author(s):  
Sophia Pathan ◽  
Danine Sullinger ◽  
Laura J. Avino ◽  
Samuel E. Culli

Background: Timely medication administration is integral to patient care, and operational delays can challenge timely administration. Within an inpatient pharmacy of an academic medical center, intravenous medications were historically compounded on a patient-specific basis. In 2020, the pharmacy began batching frequently-utilized medications. This analysis explored the impact of compounded sterile batching on pharmacy and nursing services. Methods: This pre- and post-interventional study compared data from February through March 2020 with a seasonally matched period from 2019. The primary endpoint was difference in time to administration of urgent (STAT) medications. Secondary endpoints included timeframes for a pharmacy technician to prepare, a pharmacist to check, and a nurse to administer the medications, as well as reprinted labels and estimated waste. Results: On average, it took one hour and 43 minutes to administer a STAT medication in 2019 and one hour and 57 minutes in 2020 ( p = 0.122). It took about four hours to administer routine medications in 2019 and 2020 ( p = 0.488). The number of labels reprinted decreased from 616 in 2019 to 549 in 2020 ( p = 0.195), relating to decreased missing doses. The mean time to check and send a medication decreased from 2019 to 2020 for STAT orders ( p < 0.001), and there was no difference in wasted medications looking at all orders in this time. Conclusion: Anticipatory batching decreased time to prepare, check, and send medications, though there was no effect on waste or on time to administration. Future studies can examine the correlation between pharmacy operations and medication administration.

2009 ◽  
Vol 48 (04) ◽  
pp. 350-360 ◽  
Author(s):  
Z. Niazkhani ◽  
H. van der Sijs ◽  
M. Berg ◽  
R. Bal ◽  
H. Pirnejad

Summary Objectives: To assess the impact of a CPOE system on medication-related communication of nurses and physicians. Methods: In six internal medicine wards of an academic medical center, two questionnaires were used to evaluate nurses’ attitudes toward the impact of a paper-based medication system and then a CPOE system on their communication in medication-related-activities (medication work). The questionnaires were analyzed using t-tests, followed by Bonferroni correction. Nine nurses and six physicians in the same wards were interviewed after the implementation to determine how their communication and their work have been impacted by the system. Results: The total response rates were 54% and 52% for pre- and post-implementation questionnaires. It was shown that after im plementation, the legibility and completeness of prescriptions were significantly improved (P < .001) and the administration system had a more intelligible layout (P < .001), with a more reliable overview (P < .001). The analysis of the interviews supported and confirmed the findings of the surveys. Moreover, they showed communication problems that caused difficulties in integrating medication work of nurses into physicians’. To compensate for these, nurses and physicians devised informal interactions and practices (workarounds), which often represented risks for medication errors. Conclusion: The introduction of CPOE system with paper-based medication administration system improved prescription legibility and completeness but introduced many workflow impediments and as a result error-inducing conditions. In order to prevent such an effect, CPOE systems have to support the level of communication which is necessary to integrate the work of nurses and physicians.


2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (S1) ◽  
pp. s114-s115
Author(s):  
Alexandra Johnson ◽  
Bobby Warren ◽  
Deverick John Anderson ◽  
Melissa Johnson ◽  
Isabella Gamez ◽  
...  

Background: Stethoscopes are a known vector for microbial transmission; however, common strategies used to clean stethoscopes pose certain barriers that prevent routine cleaning after every use. We aimed to determine whether using readily available alcohol-based hand rub (ABHR) would effectively reduce bacterial bioburden on stethoscopes in a real-world setting. Methods: We performed a randomized study on inpatient wards of an academic medical center to assess the impact of using ABHR (AlcareExtra; ethyl alcohol, 80%) on the bacterial bioburden of stethoscopes. Stethoscopes were obtained from healthcare providers after routine use during an inpatient examination and were randomized to control (no intervention) or ABHR disinfection (2 pumps applied to tubing and bell or diaphragm by study personnel, then allowed to dry). Cultures of the tubing and bell or diaphragm were obtained with premoistened cellulose sponges. Sponges were combined with 1% Tween20-PBS and mixed in the Seward Stomacher. The homogenate was centrifuged and all but ~5 mL of the supernatant was discarded. Samples were plated on sheep’s blood agar and selective media for clinically important pathogens (CIPs) including S. aureus, Enterococcus spp, and gram-negative bacteria (GNB). CFU count was determined by counting the number of colonies on each plate and using dilution calculations to calculate the CFU of the original ~5 mL homogenate. Results: In total, 80 stethoscopes (40 disinfection, 40 control) were sampled from 46 physicians (MDs) and MD students (57.5%), 13 advanced practice providers (16.3%), and 21 nurses (RNs) and RN students (26.3%). The median CFU count was ~30-fold lower in the disinfection arm compared to control (106 [IQR, 50–381] vs 3,320 [986–4,834]; P < .0001). The effect was consistent across provider type, frequency of recent usual stethoscope cleaning, age, and status of pet ownership (Fig. 1). Overall, 26 of 80 (33%) of stethoscopes harbored CIP. The presence of CIP was lower but not significantly different for stethoscopes that underwent disinfection versus controls: S. aureus (25% vs 32.5%), Enterococcus (2.5% vs 10%), and GNB (2.5% vs 5%). Conclusions: Stethoscopes may serve as vectors for clean hands to become recontaminated immediately prior to performing patient care activities. Using ABHR to clean stethoscopes after every use is a practical and effective strategy to reduce overall bacterial contamination that can be easily incorporated into clinical workflow. Larger studies are needed to determine the efficacy of ABHR at removing CIP from stethoscopes as stethoscopes in both arms were frequently contaminated with CIP. Prior cleaning of stethoscopes on the study day did not seem to impact contamination rates, suggesting the impact of alcohol foam disinfection is short-lived and may need to be repeated frequently (ie, after each use).Funding: NoneDisclosures: NoneDisclosures: NoneFunding: None


2004 ◽  
Vol 128 (12) ◽  
pp. 1424-1427 ◽  
Author(s):  
Martha E. Laposata ◽  
Michael Laposata ◽  
Elizabeth M. Van Cott ◽  
Dion S. Buchner ◽  
Mohammed S. Kashalo ◽  
...  

Abstract Context.—Complex coagulation test panels ordered by clinicians are typically reported to clinicians without a patient-specific interpretive paragraph. Objectives.—To survey clinicians regarding pathologist-generated interpretations of complex laboratory testing panels and to assess the ability of the interpretations to educate test orderers. Design.—Surveys were conducted of physicians ordering complex coagulation laboratory testing that included narrative interpretation. Evaluation of order requisitions was performed to assess the interpretation's influence on ordering practices. Setting.—Physicians ordering coagulation testing at a large academic medical center hospital in Boston, Mass, and physicians from outside hospitals using the academic medical center as a reference laboratory for coagulation testing. Outcome Measures.—Physician surveys and evaluation of laboratory requisition slips. Results.—In nearly 80% of responses, the ordering clinicians perceived that the interpretive comments saved them time and improved the diagnostic process. Moreover, the interpretations were perceived by ordering clinicians to help prevent a misdiagnosis or otherwise impact the differential diagnosis in approximately 70% of responses. In addition, interpretations appeared to be able to train the ordering clinicians as to the standard ordering practices. Conclusions.—The results demonstrate physician satisfaction with an innovative information delivery approach that provides laboratory diagnostic interpretation and test-ordering education to clinicians in the context of their daily workflow.


2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (Supplement_1) ◽  
pp. S188-S189
Author(s):  
Deepika Sivakumar ◽  
Shelbye R Herbin ◽  
Raymond Yost ◽  
Marco R Scipione

Abstract Background Inpatient antibiotic use early on in the COVID-19 pandemic may have increased due to the inability to distinguish between bacterial and COVID-19 pneumonia. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of COVID-19 on antimicrobial usage during three separate waves of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of patients admitted to Detroit Medical Center between 3/10/19 to 4/24/21. Median days of therapy per 1000 adjusted patient days (DOT/1000 pt days) was evaluated for all administered antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines during 4 separate time periods: pre-COVID (3/3/19-4/27/19); 1st wave (3/8/20-5/2/20); 2nd wave (12/6/21-1/30/21); and 3rd wave (3/7/21-4/24/21). Antibiotics included in our pneumonia guidelines include: amoxicillin, azithromycin, aztreonam, ceftriaxone, cefepime, ciprofloxacin, doxycycline, linezolid, meropenem, moxifloxacin, piperacillin-tazobactam, tobramycin, and vancomycin. The percent change in antibiotic use between the separate time periods was also evaluated. Results An increase in antibiotics was seen during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period (2639 [IQR 2339-3439] DOT/1000 pt days vs. 2432 [IQR 2291-2499] DOT/1000 pt days, p=0.08). This corresponded to an increase of 8.5% during the 1st wave. This increase did not persist during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, and the use decreased by 8% and 16%, respectively, compared to the pre-COVID period. There was an increased use of ceftriaxone (+6.5%, p=0.23), doxycycline (+46%, p=0.13), linezolid (+61%, p=0.014), cefepime (+50%, p=0.001), and meropenem (+29%, p=0.25) during the 1st wave compared to the pre-COVID period. Linezolid (+39%, p=0.013), cefepime (+47%, p=0.08) and tobramycin (+47%, p=0.05) use remained high during the 3rd wave compared to the pre-COVID period, but the use was lower when compared to the 1st and 2nd waves. Figure 1. Antibiotic Use 01/2019 to 04/2019 Conclusion Antibiotics used to treat bacterial pneumonia during the 1st wave of the pandemic increased and there was a shift to broader spectrum agents during that period. The increased use was not sustained during the 2nd and 3rd waves of the pandemic, possibly due to the increased awareness of the differences between patients who present with COVID-19 pneumonia and bacterial pneumonia. Disclosures All Authors: No reported disclosures


Healthcare ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 35
Author(s):  
Lesley Meng ◽  
Krzysztof Laudanski ◽  
Mariana Restrepo ◽  
Ann Huffenberger ◽  
Christian Terwiesch

We estimated the harm related to medication delivery delays across 12,474 medication administration instances in an intensive care unit using retrospective data in a large urban academic medical center between 2012 and 2015. We leveraged an instrumental variables (IV) approach that addresses unobserved confounds in this setting. We focused on nurse shift changes as disruptors of timely medication (vasodilators, antipyretics, and bronchodilators) delivery to estimate the impact of delay. The average delay around a nurse shift change was 60.8 min (p < 0.001) for antipyretics, 39.5 min (p < 0.001) for bronchodilators, and 57.1 min (p < 0.001) for vasodilators. This delay can increase the odds of developing a fever by 32.94%, tachypnea by 79.5%, and hypertension by 134%, respectively. Compared to estimates generated by a naïve regression approach, our IV estimates tend to be higher, suggesting the existence of a bias from providers prioritizing more critical patients.


Circulation ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 142 (Suppl_3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Merilyn S Varghese ◽  
Jordan B Strom ◽  
Sarah Fostello ◽  
Warren J Manning

Introduction: COVID-19 has significantly impacted hospital systems worldwide. The impact of statewide stay-at-home mandates on echocardiography volumes is unclear. Methods: We queried our institutional echocardiography database from 6/1/2018 to 6/13/2020 to examine rates of transthoracic (TTE), stress (SE), and transesophageal echocardiograms (TEE) prior to and following the COVID-19 Massachusetts stay-at-home order on March 15, 2020. Results: Among 36,377 total studies performed during the study period, mean weekly study volume dropped from 332 + 3 TTEs/week, 30 + 1 SEs/week, and 21 + 1 TEEs/week prior to the stay-at-home order (6/1/2018-3/15/2020) to 158 + 13 TTEs/week, 8 + 2 SEs/week, and 8 + 1 TEEs/week after (% change, -52%, -73%, and -62% respectively, all p < 0.001 when comparing volume prior to March 15 versus after). Weekly TTEs correlated strongly with hospital admissions throughout the study period (r = 0.93, 95% CI 0.89-0.95, p < 0.001) ( Figure ). Outpatient TTEs declined more than inpatient TTEs (% change, -74% vs. -39%, p <0.001). As of 3 weeks following the cessation of the stay-at-home order, TTE, SE, and TEE weekly volumes have increased to 73%, 66%, and 81% of pre-pandemic levels, respectively. Conclusions: Echocardiography volumes fell precipitously following the Massachusetts stay-at-home order, strongly paralleling declines in overall hospitalizations. Outpatient TTEs declined more than inpatient TTEs. Despite lifting of the order, echocardiography volumes remain substantially below pre-pandemic levels. The impact of the decreased use of echocardiographic services on patient outcomes remains to be determined.


2018 ◽  
Vol 10 (5) ◽  
pp. 583-586 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew Gorgone ◽  
Brian McNichols ◽  
Valerie J. Lang ◽  
William Novak ◽  
Alec B. O'Connor

ABSTRACT Background  Training residents to become competent in common bedside procedures can be challenging. Some hospitals have attending physician–led procedure teams with oversight of all procedures to improve procedural training, but these teams require significant resources to establish and maintain. Objective  We sought to improve resident procedural training by implementing a resident-run procedure team without routine attending involvement. Methods  We created the role of a resident procedure coordinator (RPC). Interested residents on less time-intensive rotations voluntarily served as RPC. Medical providers in the hospital contacted the RPC through a designated pager when a bedside procedure was needed. A structured credentialing process, using direct observation and a procedure-specific checklist, was developed to determine residents' competence for completing procedures independently. Checklists were developed by the residency program and approved by institutional subspecialists. The service was implemented in June 2016 at an 850-bed academic medical center with 70 internal medicine and 32 medicine-pediatrics residents. The procedure service functioned without routine attending involvement. The impact was evaluated through resident procedure logs and surveys of residents and attending physicians. Results  Compared with preimplementation procedure logs, there were substantial increases postimplementation in resident-performed procedures and the number of residents credentialed in paracenteses, thoracenteses, and lumbar punctures. Fifty-nine of 102 (58%) residents responded to the survey, with 42 (71%) reporting the initiative increased their ability to obtain procedural experience. Thirty-one of 36 (86%) attending respondents reported preferentially using the service. Conclusions  The RPC model increased resident procedural training opportunities using a structured sign-off process and an operationalized service.


2019 ◽  
Vol 98 (8) ◽  
pp. 496-499 ◽  
Author(s):  
Colin Huntley ◽  
Adam Vasconcellos ◽  
Michael Mullen ◽  
David W. Chou ◽  
Haley Geosits ◽  
...  

Objective: To evaluate the impact of upper airway stimulation therapy (UAS) on swallowing function in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Study Design: Prospective cohort study. Setting: Academic medical center. Participants and Outcome Measures: We recorded demographic, preoperative polysomnogram (PSG), operative, and postoperative PSG data. We assessed the patients swallowing function using the Eating Assessment Tool (EAT-10) dysphagia questionnaire. This was administered both pre- and postoperatively. The postoperative EAT-10 survey was administered at least 3 months after UAS implantation. Results: During the study period, 27 patients underwent UAS implantation, completed the pre- and postoperative EAT-10 questionnaire, met inclusion/exclusion criteria, and were included in the study. The cohort consisted of 16 men and 11 women with a mean age of 63.63 years. The mean preoperative BMI, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and Apnea Hypopnea Index (AHI) were 29.37, 10.33, and 34.90, respectively. The mean postoperative ESS and AHI were 5.25 and 7.59, respectively. These were both significantly lower than the preoperative values ( P = .026 and P < .001). The mean pre- and postoperative EAT-10 scores were 0.37 and 0.22, respectively ( P = .461). Conclusion: Our data suggest that UAS likely does not lead to postoperative dysphagia.


2019 ◽  
Vol 40 (9) ◽  
pp. 1056-1058
Author(s):  
Jacob W. Pierce ◽  
Andrew Kirk ◽  
Kimberly B. Lee ◽  
John D. Markley ◽  
Amy Pakyz ◽  
...  

AbstractAntipseudomonal carbapenems are an important target for antimicrobial stewardship programs. We evaluated the impact of formulary restriction and preauthorization on relative carbapenem use for medical and surgical intensive care units at a large, urban academic medical center using interrupted time-series analysis.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document