Mayo Clinic has been involved in an ongoing effort to prevent the diversion of controlled substances from the workplace and to rapidly identify and respond when such diversion is detected. These efforts have found that diversion of controlled substances is not uncommon and can result in substantial risk not only to the individual who is diverting the drugs but also to patients, co-workers, and employers. We believe that all health care facilities should have systems in place to deter controlled substance diversion and to promptly identify diversion and intervene when it is occurring. Such systems are multifaceted and require close cooperation between multiple stakeholders including, but not limited to, departments of pharmacy, safety and security, anesthesiology, nursing, legal counsel, and human resources. Ideally, there should be a broad-based appreciation of the dangers that diversion creates not only for patients but also for all employees of health care facilities, because diversion can occur at any point along a long supply chain. All health care workers must be vigilant for signs of possible diversion and must be aware of how to engage a preexisting group with expertise in investigating possible diversions. In addition, clear policies and procedures should be in place for dealing with such investigations and for managing the many possible outcomes of a confirmed diversion. This article provides an overview of the multiple types of risk that result from drug diversion from health care facilities. Further, we describe a system developed at Mayo Clinic for evaluating episodes of potential drug diversion and for taking action once diversion is confirmed.

No abstract

No abstract

Seriously injured patients undergo vigorous resuscitation upon arrival at the emergency department and through the immediate perioperative period. Although resuscitation leads to volume loading and fluid shifts, drug dosing and dosing intervals are often not altered to account for changes in total body volume or circulatory volume. To address this, a prospective study of pharmacokinetics of ceftizoxime in 53 injured adults who underwent emergency celiotomy was conducted. Further, the relationship between serum ceftizoxime concentrations and infectious outcomes was evaluated. Per protocol, injured adults undergoing emergency celiotomy received prophylactic ceftizoxime treatment according to standard dosing regimens. Of the patients, 6 (11.5%) experienced postoperative infections and had lower peak serum ceftizoxime levels in the recovery room than patients not experiencing infection. For severely injured adults with extensive blood loss or undergoing lengthy operations requiring rigorous volume resuscitation, doses of ceftizoxime, and indeed all antibiotics, may need to be increased beyond conventional standards to minimize infectious complications.

The hydrochlorothiazide component of Maxzide (Lederle Laboratories, Pearl River, NY) has been shown to be more bioavailable than the hydrochlorothiazide component of Dyazide (Smith, Kline and French Laboratories, Philadelphia, PA). The authors compared the antihypertensive effectiveness of a half-tablet of Maxzide (25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide and 37.5 mg of triamterene) to one capsule of Dyazide (25 mg of hydrochlorothiazide and 50 mg of triamterene) to determine if the difference in bioavailability would be reflected in differences in blood pressure control and metabolic changes. Thirty patients were studied in a randomized open-label crossover design study. There was a significant reduction in systolic blood pressure for both treatments although there was no difference in blood pressures at any time during the study between the two agents. There were no statistically significant differences between Maxzide and Dyazide in terms of metabolic changes for potassium, magnesium, glucose, cholesterol, triglycerides, uric acid, or calcium. Although the hydrochlorothiazide component of Maxzide is more bioavailable than that of Dyazide this did not translate into enhanced hypotensive efficacy.