Maximal aminoglycoside (AG) killing requires that the ratio of peak serum concentrations (Cmax) to the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of the pathogen exceeds by > or =10. This has been shown to hasten resolution of infection in the general patient population. It was postulated that critically ill patients, likely to have larger intravascular volumes, are underdosed. The primary aim was to determine Cmax to MIC target attainment rate in medical intensive care unit (MICU) patients. A retrospective review of MICU patients who received at least 1 intravenous dose and serum concentration of either gentamicin or tobramycin was performed. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed, and MIC distributions for AG were used in determining the Cmax/MIC and in calculating the probability of attaining the pharmacodynamic (PD) target. One hundred two unique patients with 211 AG concentrations were analyzed to determine population pharmacokinetic parameters. Mean maximum clearance (CL) was 3.14L/h (95% confidence interval: 1.26-4.54 L/h), and mean volume of distribution (V) was 53 L (95% confidence interval: 38-66.8 L/h). Glomerular filtration rate and standardized body weight were identified as significant covariates for clearance in the final model. Standardized body weight also significantly affected V. There was only a 20% and 40% probability that patients receiving 7 mg/kg of gentamicin and tobramycin, respectively, will achieve PD target over the range of MIC distributions. Based on these data, the majority of critically ill patients would not be predicted to achieve the PD target under current dosing regimens. This may be a result of intensive care unit patients having a larger volume of distribution than reported in the literature. Future recommendations for treating gram-negative infections in the MICU population include using initial doses of 7 mg/kg of either gentamicin or tobramycin, measuring Cmax after the first dose, and determining MIC for the pathogen(s) with adjustment of subsequent doses to achieve the PD target.

Objective. To design and implement a simulated patient-case assessment using a mannequin for critical care pharmacotherapeutic education of doctor of pharmacy students and to evaluate student satisfaction with the simulation. Design. During the second year of the doctor of pharmacy program, all students were required to complete Introduction to Critical Care. This course consisted of didactic education, written patientcase sessions, and an interactive patient simulation session. Information on the patient case was distributed to students after completing the didactic portion of the course. Patient information was programmed into a simulation mannequin, which demonstrated characteristics of a critically ill human. Students were surveyed post-simulation to determine the effectiveness of the learning experience. Assessment. The majority of students (88%) were extremely satisfied with the experience. The facilitator was considered to be extremely useful in 75% of responses. Conclusion. By simulating a patient case, the facilitator was able to control students' learning environment, adapt the simulation to the level of the students' performance, and debrief students immediately. Ultimately, by involving students in actual patient cases early in the pharmacy curriculum, this type of education could produce pharmacists with a high level of expertise and confidence.

These results generate the hypothesis that inpatients with cardiac arrest may have different benefits from lidocaine and amiodarone than previously demonstrated. Inadequate dosing and later administration of amiodarone in the code were two confounding factors in this study. Prospective studies evaluating these agents are warranted.

Delirium is common in acutely ill patients and can result in substantial morbidity if left untreated. Atypical antipsychotics have been postulated to be safer and more effective than haloperidol for treatment of this condition. To evaluate the role of atypical antipsychotics versus haloperidol for treatment of delirium in hospitalized acutely ill adults, we searched MEDLINE (1977-September 2006) and International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (1997-September 2006) for English-language publications of clinical trials that compared atypical antipsychotics and haloperidol. Four comparative studies were identified: one double-blind, randomized study (risperidone vs haloperidol), one single-blind, randomized study (olanzapine vs haloperidol), and two retrospective studies (olanzapine vs haloperidol and quetiapine vs haloperidol). These studies demonstrated that atypical antipsychotics are as efficacious as haloperidol. In addition, they appear to be associated with a lower frequency of extrapyramidal effects, and thus are safer than haloperidol. However, these conclusions are based on a limited number of studies; larger comparative trials are needed to elucidate the role of atypical antipsychotics for treating delirium in this population.