Hydromorphone is a semi-synthetic opioid that acts mainly on the μ-opioid receptor. Hydromorphone has a fast onset of action, usually within 5 min, and its effectiveness peaks at approximately 20 min, which makes it favourable in the postoperative setting. It plays a role in the management of moderate to severe chronic pain. The most common adverse effects of hydromorphone are hypotension, bradycardia, and respiratory distress. The aim of this study was to determine the trend in the use of hydromorphone analgesics and to evaluate hydromorphone-related toxicity in King Abdulaziz Medical City-Central Region (KAMC-CR). A retrospective, cross-sectional study was carried out in KAMC-CR, and medical and pharmacological data were retrieved from electronic health records for adult patients who used hydromorphone between December 2014 and December 2015. The characteristics of the enrolled patients, including measured blood pressure, heart rate, respiration rate, oxygen saturation, and pain severity score, were collected. Moreover, we identified patients who received naloxone as a hydromorphone antidote. A total of 153 patients were included; 64.1% were male and 35.8% were female. The mean age of the included patients was 55.5 years old (+/− 18.6). Although the majority of patients reported an improvement in pain severity, 75 patients (49%) needed naloxone to overcome adverse effects of hydromorphone. The mean age of patients who received naloxone was 56.2 years old (+/− 20.5), their mean weight was 75.9 kg (+/− 17.2), and 61.3% of them were male (n = 46). Among those who received naloxone, 84% patients (n = 63) had received hydromorphone intravenously. The risk of respiratory depression was significantly higher in patients who received hydromorphone intravenously (IV) than in those who received it orally (p = 0.02). Hydromorphone can have adverse effect. Thus, we recommend evaluating cardiac parameters, oxygen saturation, respiration rate, and pain severity before administering hydromorphone, particularly in patients who have a high risk of cardiorespiratory adverse events, such as patients with cardiac disease, asthma, or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Additionally, we recommend the use of appropriate hydromorphone doses in cases of conversion from other opioid therapy or changes between oral and IV routes of the administration of hydromorphone. Moreover, we recommend establishing a policy to restrict the prescription of hydromorphone to avoid the overuse of hydromorphone and minimize the risk of adverse effects and medication errors.

Background: Intradialysis hypotension (IDH) is the most common complication during hemodialysis procedure. Midodrine, an oral α-1 adrenergic agonist, is commonly used to prevent IDH. However, limited data is available to demonstrate midodrine effectiveness in prevention of IDH in high-risk hemodialysis patients.Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of using midodrine in patients receiving hemodialysis concerning the incidence of IDH. Also, we aimed to explore the appropriate dose for midodrine use to prevent IDH. Methods:A retrospective cohort of adult with end-stagerenal failure.Setting: Medical and pharmacy data used in this study was retrieved from electronic health records for adult patients with end-stage renal disease on hemodialysis. Exposure: Midodrine.Outcomes measure: IDH was defined as a decline in systolic blood pressure (SBP) by ≥ 20 mmHg or a decline in mean arterial pressure (MAP) by ≥ 10 mmHg during hemodialysis session. Recurrent IDH was defined as three or more episodes of IDH throughout a year.Analysis: A descriptive analysis of the frequency of IDH and recurrent IDH. We also, compared the risk of recurrent IDH across various doses of midodrine use. Result:From a total of 68-screened patients' charts, 45 patients were included in the final analysis. 41.8% (n = 28) of the study population had an IDH that required additional interventions to restore the SBP and MAP. IDH occurred in 68% (n = 19) of patients with hypoalbuminemia (P = 0.03). Recurrent IDH occurred in 36% (n = 16) of the patients over their hemodialysis procedure. Incidence of IDH (57%, p = 0.02) and recurrent IDH (36%, p = 0.04) were statistically significant in patients who received midodrine three time per week (57%) in comparison to those who received more than three days per week. Conclusion:This exploratory study shows that a considerable proportion of patients receiving midodrine did not develop IDH or recurrent IDH. A long-term follow-up study with larger number of patients in comparison to the control group would be useful to evaluate the magnitude of efficacy of midodrine in hemodialysis patients with high risk for IDH.

Background: Intradialytic hypotension (IDH) is the most common complication during hemodialysis procedure. Midodrine, an oral α-1 adrenergic agonist, is commonly used to prevent IDH. However, limited data is available to demonstrate midodrine effectiveness in prevention of IDH in high-risk hemodialysis patients. Objective: To describe the clinical outcomes of using midodrine in patients receiving hemodialysis concerning the incidence of IDH. Also, we aimed to explore the appropriate dose for midodrine use to prevent IDH. Methodology A retrospective cohort of adult with end-stage-renal failure. Exposure: Midodrine. Outcomes measure: IDH was defined as a decline in systolic blood pressure (SBP) by ≥20 mmHg or a decline in main arterial pressure (MAP) by ≥10 mmHg during hemodialysis session. Recurrent IDH was defined as three or more episodes of IDH throughout a year of starting midodrine. Analysis: A descriptive analysis of the frequency of IDH and recurrent IDH. We also, compared the risk of recurrent IDH across various doses of midodrine use. Result: From a total of 68-screened patients’ charts, 45 patients were included in the final analysis. 41.8% (n=28) of the study population had an IDH that required additional interventions to restore the SBP and MAP. IDH occurred in 68% (n=19, P=0.03) of patients with hypoalbuminemia. Recurrent IDH occurred in 36% (n=16) of the patients over their hemodialysis procedure. Incidence of treatment failure (57%, p= 0.02) and recurrent IDH (36%, p=0.04) were statistically significant in patients who received midodrine three time per week (57%) in comparison to those who received more than three days per week Conclusion: This exploratory study shows that a considerable proportion of patients receiving midodrine did not develop IDH or recurrent IDH. A long-term follow-up study with larger number of patients in comparison to the control group would be useful to evaluate the magnitude of efficacy of midodrine in hemodialysis patients with high risk for IDH. Moreover, a future prospective trial that focus on an important clinical outcomes such as cardiovascular events and mortality with midodrin is warranted.

Antibiotic drugs are the most frequently prescribed medications among hospitalized patients for life-saving purposes, mainly in immunocompromised patient, like in patient with end stage renal disease on hemodialysis (HD) or those who had documented bacterial infection. Antibiotics disposition and their pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics properties are affected in hemodialysis patient which increases the number of antibiotics dosing errors. Several epidemiological studies found that the majority of medication error related to antibiotics occurred during the prescribing phase (30.8%). However, there is missing data about the prevalence of errors in antibiotics dosing in HD patients.