Aims To evaluate whether the addition of hydrochlorothiazide (HCTZ) to intravenous furosemide is a safe and effective strategy for improving diuretic response in acute heart failure (AHF). Methods and results A prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, including patients with AHF randomized to receive HCTZ or placebo in addition to an intravenous furosemide regimen. The coprimary endpoints were changes in body weight and patient-reported dyspnoea 72 h after randomization. Secondary outcomes included metrics of diuretic response and mortality/rehospitalizations at 30 and 90 days. Safety outcomes (changes in renal function and/or electrolytes) were also assessed. Two hundred and thirty patients (48% women, 83 years) were randomized. Patients assigned to HCTZ were more likely to lose weight at 72 h than those assigned to placebo [−2.3 vs. −1.5 kg; adjusted estimated difference (notionally 95% confidence interval) −1.14 (−1.84 to −0.42); P = 0.002], but there were no significant differences in patient-reported dyspnoea (area under the curve for visual analogue scale: 960 vs. 720; P = 0.497). These results were similar 96 h after randomization. Patients allocated to HCTZ showed greater 24 h diuresis (1775 vs. 1400 mL; P = 0.05) and weight loss for each 40 mg of furosemide (at 72 and at 96 h) (P < 0.001). Patients assigned to HCTZ more frequently presented impaired renal function (increase in creatinine >26.5 μmoL/L or decrease in eGFR >50%; 46.5 vs. 17.2%; P < 0.001), but hypokalaemia and hypokalaemia were similar between groups. There were no differences in mortality or rehospitalizations. Conclusion The addition of HCTZ to loop diuretic therapy improved diuretic response in patients with AHF.

Many cancer patients presenting to the ED improperly and unsafely store, use, or dispose of opioids, thus highlighting a need to investigate the impact of patient education on such practices.

Delirium is relatively frequent and is underdiagnosed by physicians in patients with advanced cancer who are visiting the ED. Further research is needed to identify the optimal screening tool for delirium in ED. Cancer 2016. © 2016 American Cancer Society. Cancer 2016;122:2918-2924. © 2016 American Cancer Society.

Purpose. Cancer pain management guidelines recommend initial treatment with intermediate‐strength analgesics such as hydrocodone and subsequent escalation to stronger opioids such as morphine. There are no published studies on the process of opioid rotation (OR) from hydrocodone to strong opioids in cancer patients. Our aim was to determine the opioid rotation ratio (ORR) of hydrocodone to morphine equivalent daily dose (MEDD) in cancer outpatients. Patients and Methods. We reviewed the records of consecutive patient visits at our supportive care center in 2011–2012 for OR from hydrocodone to stronger opioids. Data regarding demographics, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS), and MEDD were collected from patients who returned for follow‐up within 6 weeks. Linear regression analysis was used to estimate the ORR between hydrocodone and MEDD. Successful OR was defined as 2‐point or 30% reduction in the pain score and continuation of the new opioid at follow‐up. Results. Overall, 170 patients underwent OR from hydrocodone to stronger opioid. The median age was 59 years, and 81% had advanced cancer. The median time between OR and follow‐up was 21 days. We found 53% had a successful OR with significant improvement in the ESAS pain and symptom distress scores. In 100 patients with complete OR and no worsening of pain at follow‐up, the median ORR from hydrocodone to MEDD was 1.5 (quintiles 1–3: 0.9–2). The ORR was associated with hydrocodone dose (r = −.52; p < .0001) and was lower in patients receiving ≥40 mg of hydrocodone per day (p < .0001). The median ORR of hydrocodone to morphine was 1.5 (n = 44) and hydrocodone to oxycodone was 0.9 (n = 24). Conclusion. The median ORR from hydrocodone to MEDD was 1.5 and varied according to hydrocodone dose.