scholarly journals Pharmacists in Critical Care

2019 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 8
Author(s):  
AK Mohiuddin

The beginnings of caring for critically ill patients date back to Florence Nightingale’s work during the Crimean War in 1854, but the subspecialty of critical care medicine is relatively young. The first US multidisciplinary intensive care unit (ICU) was established in 1958, and the American Board of Medical Subspecialties first recognized the subspecialty of critical care medicine in 1986. Critical care pharmacy services began around the 1970s, growing in the intervening 40 years to become one of the largest practice areas for clinical pharmacists, with its own section in the SCCM, the largest international professional organization in the field. During the next decade, pharmacy services expanded to various ICU settings (both adult and pediatric), the operating room, and the emergency department.  In these settings, pharmacists established clinical practices consisting of therapeutic drug monitoring, nutrition support, and participation in patient care rounds. Pharmacists also developed efficient and safe drug delivery systems with the evolution of critical care pharmacy satellites and other innovative programs. In the 1980s, critical care pharmacists designed specialized training programs and increased participation in critical care organizations.    The number of critical care residencies and fellowships doubled between the early 1980s and the late 1990s.  Standards for critical care residency were developed, and directories of residencies and fellowships were published. In 1989, the Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology Section was formed within the Society of Critical Care Medicine, the largest international, multidisciplinary, multispecialty critical care organization. This recognition acknowledged that pharmacists are necessary and valuable members of the physician-led multidisciplinary team. The Society of Critical Care Medicine Guidelines for Critical Care Services and Personnel deem that pharmacists are essential for the delivery of quality care to critically ill patients.    These guidelines recommend that a pharmacist monitor drug regimen for dosing, adverse reactions, drug-drug interactions, and cost optimization for all hospitals providing critical care services. The guidelines also advocate that a specialized, decentralized pharmacist provide expertise in nutrition support, cardiorespiratory resuscitation, and clinical research in academic medical centers providing comprehensive critical care.   Article Type: Commentary

2017 ◽  
Vol 52 (1) ◽  
pp. 17-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
Diana Wells Mulherin ◽  
Sarah V. Cogle

Specialized nutrition support is often employed in critically ill patients who are unable to maintain volitional intake. The Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) and American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition (A.S.P.E.N.) recently updated guidelines for the provision of nutrition support in critically ill patients. The purpose of this review is to summarize key changes from the previous guidelines as they relate to recently published literature, which will aid the hospital pharmacist in optimizing nutrition support therapies in the critical care setting.


2018 ◽  
Vol 42 (7) ◽  
pp. 425-443
Author(s):  
F.J. González de Molina Ortiz ◽  
F. Gordo Vidal ◽  
A. Estella García ◽  
P. Morrondo Valdeolmillos ◽  
J.F. Fernández Ortega ◽  
...  

1990 ◽  
Vol 36 (8) ◽  
pp. 1552-1556 ◽  
Author(s):  
J R Hall

Abstract Critical-care medicine today is practiced by anesthesiologists, internists, pediatricians, and surgeons. Outcome from today's management of critically ill patients is very good, yet associated costs are very high. Over one-half of the hospital costs of critically ill patients emanates from the intensive-care unit (ICU), although the ICU stay accounts for less than 20% of their time in the hospital. Outside of the operating room, the ICU is the most expensive location for patient care in the hospital, and laboratory tests are the most expensive single item. Plans for cost containment should incorporate the following: more effective data management, education of practitioners about appropriateness and costs of tests, conversion from laboratory measurements to appropriate in vivo and ex vivo measurements, and real-time utilization assessment. To provide high-quality, cost-effective critical care in the future, laboratorians and clinicians must work together today to meet the challenges of technology, data management, and staff education.


2001 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 70-85
Author(s):  
Maria I. Rudis ◽  
David Q. Hoang

Background: There have been significant recent advances in the pharmacotherapeutic management of critically ill patients. The purpose of this article is to review and discuss the most pertinent published literature in the areas of neurology, cardiovascular diseases, infectious diseases, nephrology, hematology, and gastroenterology as it pertains to critical care in order to provide an update for the critical care practitioner. Methods: We performed a Medline search from July 1999 to December 2000 utilizing terms relating to the pharmacotherapy of the specific aforementioned topics in critical care medicine. We focused on English-language clinical studies performed in adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients. From these articles we selected those that would have a practical impact on drug therapy in the ICU or the development of drug usage guidelines for critically ill patients. Review articles were generally not included. Results: The following topics were found to be either new developments or of potentially significant impact in the management of adult critically ill patients. In the area of neurology, advances were found with respect to optimization of regimens for sedative and neuromuscular blocking agents, validation of sedation scales and tools, and in the treatment of head injury patients. In the cardiovascular diseases, most studies related to the hemodynamic support of septic shock. We focus on developments in fluid resuscitation, optimization of global and regional oxygen transport variables, the repositioning of vasopressor agents, and a return to the use of steroids. Given the high mortality rate associated with the development of acute renal failure in the ICU, there has been a consistent attempt to develop preventative and treatment strategies for these patients, including optimization of antimicrobial dosing methods. Several epidemiological and longitudinal studies document changes in multi-drug antimicrobial resistance patterns. The use of treatment guidelines for antimicrobials in the critically ill improves outcomes in most patients. Significant attention has focused on the characterization of anemia in the ICU and the development of alternative pharmacological strategies in its treatment. Finally, in gastroenterology, the main focus has been the investigation of methods to optimize the delivery of enteral nutrition given its proven benefits in critically ill patients. Conclusions: Significant advances in the areas of neurological, cardiovascular, infectious diseases, renal, hematological, and gastrointestinal issues in the pharmacotherapy of critically ill patients have been published over the course of the past year. Many of these studies have yielded data that may be incorporated into the pharmacotherapeutic management of ICU patients, hence maximizing outcomes.


2020 ◽  
Vol 49 (8) ◽  
pp. 573-581
Author(s):  
Charles CH Lew ◽  
Chengsi Ong ◽  
Amartya Mukhopadhyay ◽  
Andrea Marshall ◽  
Yaseen M Arabi

Introduction: Number of recently published studies on nutritional support in the intensive care unit (ICU) have resulted in a paradigm shift of clinical practices. This review summarises the latest evidence in four main topics in the ICU, namely: (1) function of validated nutrition screening/assessment tools, (2) types and validity of body composition measurements, (3) optimal energy and protein goals, and (4) delivery methods. Methods: Recent studies that investigated the above aims were outlined and discussed. In addition, recent guidelines were also compared to highlight the similarities and differences in their approach to the nutrition support of critically ill patients. Results: Regardless of nutritional status and body composition, all patients with >48 hours of ICU stay are at nutrition risk and should receive individualised nutrition support. Although a recent trial did not demonstrate an advantage of indirect calorimetry over predictive equations, it was recommended that indirect calorimetry be used to set energy targets with better accuracy. Initiation of enteral nutrition (EN) within 24–48 hours was shown to be associated with improved clinical outcomes. The energy and protein goals should be achieved gradually over the first week of ICU stay. This practice should be protocolised and regularly audited as critically ill patients receive only part of their energy and protein goals. Conclusions: Metabolic demands of critically ill patients can be variable and nutrition support should be tailored to each patient. Given that many nutrition studies are on-going, we anticipate improvements in the individualisation of nutrition support in the near future. Key words: Critical care, Critical illness, Intensive care, Nutrition, Nutritional intake, Nutrition support


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 ◽  
pp. 117863372095207
Author(s):  
Alexander H Flannery ◽  
Drayton A Hammond ◽  
Douglas R Oyler ◽  
Chenghui Li ◽  
Adrian Wong ◽  
...  

Introduction: Critically ill patients and their pharmacokinetics present complexities often not considered by consensus guidelines from the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists, the Infectious Diseases Society of America, and the Society of Infectious Diseases Pharmacists. Prior surveys have suggested discordance between certain guideline recommendations and reported infectious disease pharmacist practice. Vancomycin dosing practices, including institutional considerations, have not previously been well described in the critically ill patient population. Objectives: To evaluate critical care pharmacists’ self-reported vancomycin practices in comparison to the 2009 guideline recommendations and other best practices identified by the study investigators. Methods: An online survey developed by the Research and Scholarship Committee of the Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology (CPP) Section of the Society of Critical Care Medicine (SCCM) was sent to pharmacist members of the SCCM CPP Section practicing in adult intensive care units in the spring of 2017. This survey queried pharmacists’ self-reported practices regarding vancomycin dosing and monitoring in critically ill adults. Results: Three-hundred and sixty-four responses were received for an estimated response rate of 26%. Critical care pharmacists self-reported largely following the 2009 vancomycin dosing and monitoring guidelines. The largest deviations in guideline recommendation compliance involve consistent use of a loading dose, dosing weight in obese patients, and quality improvement efforts related to systematically monitoring vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity. Variation exists regarding pharmacist protocols and other practices of vancomycin use in critically ill patients. Conclusion: Among critical care pharmacists, reported vancomycin practices are largely consistent with the 2009 guideline recommendations. Variations in vancomycin dosing and monitoring protocols are identified, and rationale for guideline non-adherence with loading doses elucidated.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document