No abstract

No abstract

Purpose Obstructing nephrolithiasis is a common condition that can require urgent intervention. In this study we analyze patient factors that contribute to delayed intervention during acute stone admission. Materials and Methods We retrospectively reviewed the HCUP SID (Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project State Inpatient Database) for Florida and California from 2007 to 2011. Patients who were admitted urgently with nephrolithiasis and an indication for decompression (urinary tract infection, acute renal insufficiency and/or sepsis) were included in the study. Intervention was timely or delayed, defined as a procedure that occurred within or after 48 hours, respectively. Adjusted multivariate models were fit to assess factors that predicted a delayed procedure as well as mortality. Results Overall 10,301 patients were admitted urgently for nephrolithiasis with indications for decompression. Early intervention occurred in 6,689 patients (65%) and was associated with a decrease in mortality (11, 0.16%), compared to delayed intervention (17 of 3,612, 0.47%, p=0.002). On multivariate analysis timely intervention significantly decreased the odds of inpatient mortality (OR 0.43, p=0.044). Weekend day admission significantly influenced time to intervention, decreasing patient odds of timely intervention by 26% (p <0.001). Other factors decreasing patient odds of timely intervention included non-Caucasian race and nonprivate insurance. Presenting medical diagnoses of urinary tract infection, sepsis and acute renal failure did not appear to influence time to intervention. Conclusions Delayed operative intervention for acute nephrolithiasis admissions with indications for decompression results in increased patient mortality. Nonmedical factors such as the “weekend effect,” race and insurance provider exerted the greatest influence on the timing of intervention.

No abstract

Background Alternative administration methods are emerging as a key area of research to improve clinical efficacy of antibiotics and address concerns regarding multi-drug resistance. Extended intermittent infusions or continuous infusions of antibiotics exhibiting time-dependent kill characteristics may be favourable in critically ill septic patients, but more evidence is needed to determine best practice. Objective To find out whether any common practice exists for intravenous antibiotic administration in critical care units across UK NHS Trusts, and identify factors influencing the adoption of extended or continuous infusions. Setting UK hospitals. Method UK critical care pharmacists were invited to participate in a survey on behalf of all 240 critical care units via a UK Clinical Pharmacy Association message board. The survey focused on administration practices for 22 antibacterial agents. Main outcome measure Antibiotic administration method. Results Responses were received covering 64 units, a response rate of 26.2%. Common, but not uniform administration methods were apparent for 17/22 antibiotics. Four antibiotics (piperacillin/tazobactam, doripenem, meropenem and vancomycin) were more likely to be administered as continuous or extended-intermittent infusions. Choice of administration method was especially influenced by altered pk/pd properties in sepsis or severe burns patients, or by the presence of organisms requiring high minimal inhibitory concentrations. Conclusion Unlicensed alternative practices of antibiotic administration are widespread but only weak evidence exists of any patient benefit, such as reduced length of stay in critical care, and none showing improvement in mortality. Further research is needed to determine whether extended infusion methods offer clinically meaningful advantages over shorter licenced administration methods in patients in critical care units.