Implementation of a renal pharmacist consultant service: information sharing in paper versus digital form

What is known and objective Renal impairment (RI) and renal drug-related problems (rDRP) often remain unrecognized in the community setting. A “renal pharmacist consultant service” (RPCS) at hospital admission can support patient safety by detecting rDRP. However, the efficient information sharing from pharmacists to physicians is still discussed. The aim of the study was to test the implementation of a RPCS and its effectiveness on prescription changes and to evaluate two ways of written information sharing with physicians. Methods Urological patients with eGFRnon-indexed of 15-59 ml/min and ≥1 drug were reviewed for manifest and potential rDRP at admission by a pharmacist. Written recommendations for dose or drug adaptation were forwarded to physicians comparing two routes: July-September 2017 paper form in handwritten chart; November 2017-January 2018 digital PDF document in the electronic patient information system and e-mail alert. Prescription changes regarding manifest rDRP were evaluated and compared with a previous retrospective study without RPCS. Results and discussion The RPCS detected rDRP in 63 of 234 (26.9%) patients and prepared written recommendations (median 1 rDRP (1-5) per patient) concerning 110 of 538 (20.5%) drugs at admission. For manifest rDRP, acceptance rates of recommendations were 62.5% (paper) vs 42.9% (digital) (P = 0.16). Compared with the retrospective study without RPCS (prescription changes in 21/76 rDRP; 27.6%), correct prescribing concerning manifest rDRP significantly increased by 27.1%. What is new and conclusion A RPCS identifies patients at risk for rDRP and significantly increases appropriate prescribing by physicians. In our hospital (no electronic order entry, electronic chart or ward pharmacists), consultations in paper form seem to be superior to a digital PDF document

Accuracy of freely available online GFR calculators using the CKD-EPI equation

Purpose!#!Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) as calculated by the Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration (CKD-EPI) equation is used for detection of chronic kidney disease and drug dose adjustment. The purpose of the present study was to investigate the accuracy of freely available eGFR online calculators.!##!Methods!#!All identified CKD-EPI online calculators were run with five reference cases differing in age, sex, serum creatinine, and ethnicity. Conversion from eGFR!##!Results!#!Only 36 of 47 calculators (76.6%) produced accurate eGFR results for all reference cases. Eight of 47 (17.0%) calculators were considered as faulty because of errors relating to ethnicity (4 calculators), to conversion of the eGFR unit (2 calculators), to erroneous eGFR values without obvious explanation (2 calculators), to conversion of the creatinine unit (1 calculator), and to an error in the eGFR unit displayed (1 calculator). Overall, 28 errors were found (range 59 to 147% of the correct eGFR value), the majority concerning calculation of eGFR!##!Conclusions!#!Erroneous calculations that might lead to inappropriate clinical decision-making were found in 8 of 47 calculators. Thus, online calculators should be evaluated more thoroughly after implementation. Conversion of eGFR units that might be needed for drug dose adjustments should be implemented more often

Benefit of medication reviews by renal pharmacists in the setting of a computerized physician order entry system with clinical decision support

What Is Known and Objective A 'renal pharmacist consultant service' (RPCS) reviewing patients' charts with renal impairment (RI) for drug-related problems (DRP) can foster patient safety. However, the benefit of this service in the new setting of a computerized physician order entry (CPOE)-system with a clinical decision support (CDS)-system is unknown. The aim of our study was to evaluate the general need for an RPCS on wards with a CPOE-CDS-system already in use and its effectiveness on prescription changes to ensure in-hospital patient safety. Methods Over a period of 3 months (02-04/2021), elective orthopaedic and trauma patients with eGFR(absolute)/CrCl <60 ml/min at a German University Hospital received a medication review by a renal pharmacist for all medication entered into the CPOE-system (Meona (R)) by the treating physicians. Written consultations explaining identified DRP and recommending interventions to solve them, for example, dose or drug adaptation, were shared with the physicians directly in the drug chart tab of Meona (R). In complex cases, DRP were additionally discussed via phone. The prescription changes were evaluated retrospectively. Results and Discussion During 53 working days, 712 (30.5%) of 2331 screened patients were included with an eGFR(non-indexed)/CrCl <60 ml/min and a pharmacist-led medication review was performed for all medication presented in the CPOE-system (Meona (R)). In 79 of 712 (11.1%) patients, one or more DRP were detected (median 1 DRP (1-3) per patient) and written recommendations concerning 106 of 1090 (9.7%) drugs were shared via Meona (R). In total, 104 DRP were identified, mostly caused by 'dosage too high' (n = 55, 52.9%), 'dosage regime wrong' (n = 13, 12.5%), and 'contraindication' (n = 9, 8.7%). Acceptance rate of recommendations was 74.0% (n = 77/104). In nine cases (8.7%), despite of specific recommendations, no adjustment of drugs was made because of lack of alternatives. In 11 (10.6%) cases, prescription remained unchanged for unknown reasons and in seven (6.7%) cases, the result was unknown due to discharge. What Is New and Conclusion In the setting of prescribing in a CPOE-CDS-system, that provides physicians with advice for drug or dose adaption, the pharmacist-led medication reviews still identified DRP in orthopaedic and trauma patients with RI. A RPCS forwarding recommendations to solve DRP via the electronic medical record increased appropriate prescribing by physicians and, thus, may further improve patient safety

SARS-CoV-2 vaccination modelling for safe surgery to save lives: data from an international prospective cohort study

Background Preoperative SARS-CoV-2 vaccination could support safer elective surgery. Vaccine numbers are limited so this study aimed to inform their prioritization by modelling. Methods The primary outcome was the number needed to vaccinate (NNV) to prevent one COVID-19-related death in 1 year. NNVs were based on postoperative SARS-CoV-2 rates and mortality in an international cohort study (surgical patients), and community SARS-CoV-2 incidence and case fatality data (general population). NNV estimates were stratified by age (18-49, 50-69, 70 or more years) and type of surgery. Best- and worst-case scenarios were used to describe uncertainty. Results NNVs were more favourable in surgical patients than the general population. The most favourable NNVs were in patients aged 70 years or more needing cancer surgery (351; best case 196, worst case 816) or non-cancer surgery (733; best case 407, worst case 1664). Both exceeded the NNV in the general population (1840; best case 1196, worst case 3066). NNVs for surgical patients remained favourable at a range of SARS-CoV-2 incidence rates in sensitivity analysis modelling. Globally, prioritizing preoperative vaccination of patients needing elective surgery ahead of the general population could prevent an additional 58 687 (best case 115 007, worst case 20 177) COVID-19-related deaths in 1 year. Conclusion As global roll out of SARS-CoV-2 vaccination proceeds, patients needing elective surgery should be prioritized ahead of the general population.The aim of this study was to inform vaccination prioritization by modelling the impact of vaccination on elective inpatient surgery. The study found that patients aged at least 70 years needing elective surgery should be prioritized alongside other high-risk groups during early vaccination programmes. Once vaccines are rolled out to younger populations, prioritizing surgical patients is advantageous