The high prevalence of prescription of drugs not appropriate for children confirms, in the Brazilian context, the inadequate and inadvertent use of drugs either not approved or off-label for PICU use. This demonstrates the need to encourage further studies on the quality, efficacy and safety of drugs for pediatric use.

IntroductionThe expected therapeutic response may be affected by the presence of drug interactions. With the high number of reports on new drug interactions, it has been difficult for health professionals to keep constantly updated. For this reason, computer systems have helped identify such interactions.ObjectivesTo verify the rate and profile of drug interactions in medical prescriptions to hospitalized pediatric patients.MethodsA descriptive study investigated prescriptions to hospitalized pediatric patients. The study included patients between 0 and 12 years old, containing 4 or more drugs in their prescriptions. The analysis of interaction and incompatibility possibilities in prescribed drugs used Micromedex / Drug-Reax® program.ResultsFrom 2005 to 2006, 3,170 patients were investigated, and 11,181 prescriptions were analyzed, a mean value of 3.5 prescriptions/patient. In total, 6,857 drug interactions were found, which corresponds to 1.9 interaction/prescription. Among them, relevance to ampicillin and gentamicin, found in 220 (3.2%) prescriptions. In total, 2,411 drug incompatibilities in via y were found, a mean value of 0.5/prescription, with emphasis on vancomycin and cefepime, found in 243 (10.0%) prescriptions.ConclusionThe presence of drug interactions is a permanent risk in hospitals. This way, the utilization of computer programs, pharmacotherapy monitoring of patients and the pharmacist presence in the multidisciplinary team are some manners of contributing to hospitalized patients’ treatment.

Background: A recent systematic review concluded that critically ill pediatric patients have higher odds of vancomycin-related nephrotoxicity [odds ratio (OR): 3.61, 95% CI: 1.21–10.74]. We aimed to assess the incidence and risk factors for vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity in critically ill children without preexisting renal injury. Methods: A cohort of children admitted to a pediatric intensive care unit, from 2011 to 2016 treated with vancomycin without preexisting renal injury. The main diagnosis, therapeutic interventions and medications administered in this period were evaluated. Generalized estimating equation models were used to assess the association between clinical covariates and the dependent variable pediatric risk, injury, failure, loss, end-stage renal disease (pRIFLE). Results: Hundred ten patients, representing 1177 vancomycin days, were analyzed. Vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity was seen in 11.8%. In a multivariate model, higher vancomycin doses were not associated with poorer renal function (P = 0.08). Higher serum vancomycin levels were weakly associated with pRIFLE classification (OR: 1.05, 95% CI: 1.02–1.07). Furosemide or amphotericin B in addition to the vancomycin treatment was associated with impaired renal function (OR: 2.56, 95% CI: 1.38–4.8 and OR: 7.7 95% CI: 2.55–23, respectively). Conclusions: Vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity in acute ill children without preexisting renal injury, measured with pRIFLE, is close to 11.8%. Furosemide and amphotericin B in addition to the vancomycin treatment are strong predictors of worse pRIFLE scores. The influence of acute kidney injury status at pediatric intensive care unit admission and the method used for renal function assessment might influence the incidence of vancomycin-associated nephrotoxicity and its associated risk factors.

Objective:To identify and describe actual or potential medication errors related to drug information inquiries made by staff members of a teaching hospital to a Drug Information Centre from January 2012 to December 2013.Methods:Data were collected from the records of inquiries made by health care professionals to the Drug Information Centre throughout this period.Results:During the study period, the Drug Information Centre received 3,500 inquiries. Of these, 114 inquiries had medication errors. Most errors were related to prescribing, preparation, and administration and were classified according to severity as category B (57%) (potential errors) and categories C (26.3%) and D (15.8%) (actual errors that did not result in harm to the patient). Error causes included overdose (13.2%), wrong route of administration (11.4%), inadequate drug storage (11.4%), and wrong dosage form (8.8%). The drugs most frequently involved in errors were vitamin K (4.4%), vancomycin (3.5%), and meropenem (3.5%).Conclusion:In this study, it was not possible to measure the reduction in error rate involving medication use because of the lack of previous data on this process in the institution. However, our findings indicate that the Drug Information Centre may be used as a strategy to seek improvements in processes involving medication use.

Introduction: Care bundles help healthcare professionals provide the best care possible in a structured and reliable way. The purpose of this study was to develop and apply an instrument for inpatient follow-up by clinical pharmacists, and evaluate its results. Methods:The care bundle was based on previously validated instruments. Population consisted of patients monitored by clinical pharmacists at a general hospital. The study was conducted in two phases: the first involved the development and implementation of the bundle, and the evaluation of pharmaceutical interventions; the second involved analyzing data from patients treated with the bundle over one year. Results:The bundle included fourteen pharmaceutical follow-up criteria used in different patterns by each area of care. In the first phase of the study, 3263 patients were monitored and 536 pharmaceutical interventions were performed, with an 85.3% compliance rate. In the second phase of the study, follow-up data was collected from 21,214 patients. The bundle criteria were used in a similar way in clinical, surgical and cancer patients. Pharmacotherapy review was the most prevalent intervention in all cases (60.1%). Hospital discharge planning and medication reconciliation were performed with a similar frequency in clinical, surgical, pediatric and general patients. Conclusions:The development and validation of a bundle aimed at guiding the clinical activities of pharmacists helped standardize procedures and interventions. Pharmacotherapy review was the bundle criterion with the highest rate of application and interventions due to the hospital's complexity and the need to consider individual patient needs and follow institutional policies.