Background Intravenous drug administration is associated with potential complications, such as phlebitis. The physiochemical characteristics of the infusate play a very important role in some of these problems. Aim The aim of this study was to standardize the dilutions of intravenous drugs most commonly used in hospitalized adult patients and to characterize their pH, osmolarity and cytotoxic nature to better guide the selection of the most appropriate vascular access. Methods The project was conducted in three phases: (i) standardization of intravenous therapy, which was conducted using a modified double-round Delphi method; (ii) characterization of the dilutions agreed on in the previous phase by means of determining the osmolarity and pH of each of the agreed concentrations, and recording the vesicant nature based on the information in literature; and (iii) algorithm proposal for selecting the most appropriate vascular access, taking into account the information gathered in the previous phases. Results In total, 112 drugs were standardized and 307 different admixtures were assessed for pH, osmolarity and vesicant nature. Of these, 123 admixtures (40%), had osmolarity values >600 mOsm/L, pH < 4 or > 9, or were classified as vesicants. In these cases, selection of the most suitable route of infusion and vascular access device is crucial to minimize the risk of phlebitis-type complications. Conclusions Increasing safety of intravenous therapy should be a priority in the healthcare settings. Knowing the characteristics of drugs to assess the risk involved in their administration related to their physicochemical nature may be useful to guide decision making regarding the most appropriate vascular access and devices.

Purpose: Abatacept was approved in our hospital by the Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee for treatment of moderate to severe rheumatoid arthritis (RA) in adult patients with inadequate response or intolerance to disease modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), including at least one anti-tumour necrosis factor (anti-TNF). The objectives of this study were to analyze compliance with our protocol and to evaluate effectiveness and safety of abatacept in our patients. Methods: We performed a descriptive longitudinal study of patients with RA treated with abatacept between August 2008 and May 2010 in our day care unit. We reviewed clinical records and recorded the following data: sex, age, weight, year of diagnosis, previous antirheumatic treatments and reasons for withdrawal of anti-TNFs, indication for abatacept, dose and date of administration, Disease Activity Score (DAS28) and adverse events. Effectiveness was evaluated using the European League Against Rheumatism (EULAR) criteria. Results: We recruited 16 patients. Mean follow-up time was 10.4 (SD: 6.1) months. All patients had been previously treated with DMARDs, including at least one anti-TNF, and the mean dose of abatacept was 9.4 (SD: 1.4) mg/kg. During the first 6 months of treatment, 11/16 of patients experienced a decrease in their DAS28 value, but only 5/16 achieved a satisfactory response. Dyspnea was the most frequent adverse event (7/16), followed by fatigue and asthenia (6/16) and dry skin (5/16). Conclusions: The indication for abatacept in our hospital complied with the protocol approved by the Pharmacy and Therapeutics Committee. Only 5/16 of patients achieved a satisfactory response; however, it should be noted that these patients had moderate to severe RA that was refractory to other treatments. Adverse reactions were consistent with those described in the summary of product characteristics. Further studies with larger cohorts are needed to analyze the long-term safety and effectiveness profile in clinical practice. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

No abstract

No abstract