Disclaimer In an effort to expedite the publication of articles, AJHP is posting manuscripts online as soon as possible after acceptance. Accepted manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and copyedited, but are posted online before technical formatting and author proofing. These manuscripts are not the final version of record and will be replaced with the final article (formatted per AJHP style and proofed by the authors) at a later time. Purpose To evaluate the impact of a collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) agreement allowing a pharmacist to automatically prescribe refills of discharge medications to patients’ preferred outpatient pharmacy on utilization of a hospital discharge prescription program and hospital readmission rates. Methods This was a single-center, quasi-experimental pre-post intervention study. Patients aged 18 years or older discharged from the cardiology services to home were eligible for inclusion in the study. The CDTM agreement was initiated on July 1, 2019. Patients discharged to home from July 1, 2018, to June 30, 2019, were assigned to the historical control group. The primary outcome was the difference in the proportion of patients who used the bedside medication delivery service at hospital discharge between the groups. Secondary outcomes included 30-day hospital readmissions and a descriptive analysis of medications prescribed by a pharmacist through the program. A χ2 test was used to assess the primary outcome, and multivariable logistic regression was used to assess hospital readmissions. Results In total, 1,704 and 2,200 patients were discharged in the control and CDTM groups, respectively. The CDTM group had a greater proportion of patients who participated in the discharge prescription program compared to the historical control group (77.8% vs 68.7%; P < 0.0001). There was no difference in 30-day hospital readmission rate between the groups (adjusted odds ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.23; P = 0.94). Conclusion A CDTM protocol to improve the availability of medication refills at a patient’s regular outpatient pharmacy improved utilization of a bedside medication delivery service but did not change 30-day readmission rates.

:Tirofiban has been used historically as a bridge to platelet inhibition with clopidogrel in ST-segment myocardial infarction (STEMI) during percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) to prevent stent thrombosis. However, ticagrelor and prasugrel reach similar levels of platelet inhibition at 30 minutes to that of clopidogrel at 6 hours, challenging the need for long-duration tirofiban. This 1-year, retrospective cohort study compared ischemic and bleeding outcomes of short-duration versus long-duration tirofiban regimens in patients with STEMI who received ticagrelor or prasugrel at the time of PCI. The primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs) including cardiovascular mortality, recurrent myocardial infarction, urgent target vessel revascularization, or stroke. Secondary outcomes included individual MACE, all-cause mortality, bleeding events defined by the International Society on Thrombosis and Hemostasis, thirty-day readmissions for MACE and bleeding, and tirofiban pharmacy cost. A total of 283 charts were reviewed and 177 included (short duration n = 57; long duration n = 120). MACE rates were similar between short-duration and long-duration groups (0 [0%] vs. 5 [4.2%]; P = 0.18), including 4 cardiovascular deaths and 1 recurrent myocardial infarction. Bleeding event rates were also similar in short-duration versus long-duration groups including major bleeds (2 [3.5%] vs. 2 [1.7%]; P = 0.60) and clinically relevant nonmajor bleeds (3 [5.3%] vs. 9 [7.5%]; P = 0.75). Cost analysis indicated lower pharmacy cost with the short-duration group. In this cohort of patients with STEMI receiving a fast-acting P2Y12 inhibitor, the length of tirofiban infusion did not affect ischemic or bleeding outcomes, yet short-duration regimens were lower cost.

:Regardless of early invasive or ischemia-guided approaches to non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction (NSTEMI) management, P2Y12 inhibitors remain the backbone in therapy. The ideal timing of administration remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to determine the safety and effectiveness of early versus late administration of P2Y12 inhibitors in patients presenting with an NSTEMI who go to the catheterization laboratory beyond 24 hours from presentation. We performed a single center, retrospective cohort study. Patients were classified into groups depending on whether they received early versus late administration of a P2Y12 inhibitor. The primary outcome was the rate of major and clinically relevant, nonmajor bleeding (CRNMB). Secondary outcomes included troponin peak and length of stay after cardiac catheterization. Of the 121 patients included, 53 patients were in the early and 68 patients were in the late group. The number of bleeding events were similar between both groups (P = 1.00). There were 3 (5.7%) major bleeding events in the early group and 5 (7.4%) bleeding events in the late group. There were 5 (9.4%) CRNMB events in the early group and 6 (8.8%) CRNMB events in the late group. There was a significant difference in troponin peak, 4.56 ng/mL in the early group and 1.77 ng/mL in the late group (P = 0.02). The rate of bleeding did not differ between patients who received early or late administration of P2Y12 inhibitors for NSTEMI management who undergo delayed cardiac catheterization.