Background Adverse drug events are a leading cause of emergency department visits and unplanned admissions, and prolong hospital stays. Medication review interventions aim to identify adverse drug events and optimize medication use. Previous evaluations of in-hospital medication reviews have focused on interventions at discharge, with an unclear effect on health outcomes. We assessed the effect of early in-hospital pharmacist-led medication review on the health outcomes of high-risk patients. Methods We used a quasi-randomized design to evaluate a quality improvement project in three hospitals in British Columbia, Canada. We incorporated a clinical decision rule into emergency department triage pathways, allowing nurses to identify patients at high-risk for adverse drug events. After randomly selecting the first eligible patient for participation, clinical pharmacists systematically allocated subsequent high-risk patients to medication review or usual care. Medication review included obtaining a best possible medication history and reviewing the patient's medications for appropriateness and adverse drug events. The primary outcome was the number of days spent in-hospital over 30 days, and was ascertained using administrative data. We used median and inverse propensity score weighted logistic regression modeling to determine the effect of pharmacist-led medication review on downstream health services use. Results Of 10,807 high-risk patients, 6,416 received early pharmacist-led medication review and 4,391 usual care. Their baseline characteristics were balanced. The median number of hospital days was reduced by 0.48 days (95% confidence intervals [CI] = 0.00 to 0.96; p = 0.058) in the medication review group compared to usual care, representing an 8% reduction in the median length of stay. Among patients under 80 years of age, the median number of hospital days was reduced by 0.60 days (95% CI = 0.06 to 1.17; p = 0.03), representing 11% reduction in the median length of stay. There was no significant effect on emergency department revisits, admissions, readmissions, or mortality. Limitations We were limited by our inability to conduct a randomized controlled trial, but used quasi-random patient allocation methods and propensity score modeling to ensure balance between treatment groups, and administrative data to ensure blinded outcomes ascertainment. We were unable to account for alternate level of care days, and therefore, may have underestimated the treatment effect in frail elderly patients who are likely to remain in hospital while awaiting long-term care. Conclusions Early pharmacist-led medication review was associated with reduced hospital-bed utilization compared to usual care among high-risk patients under 80 years of age, but not among those who were older. The results of our evaluation suggest that medication review by pharmacists in the emergency department may impact the length of hospital stay in select patient populations.
Summary Background Coffee is consumed by 50 percent of Americans every day. After oil, coffee is the second most valuable commodity in the world. In recent years a number of studies have suggested potential health risks associated with coffee consumption; however, the results are controversial. Whilst coffee has been reported to increase cardiovascular risk factors, other investigators have demonstrated its protective effects on diseases ranging from type 2 diabetes to Parkinson's disease. A number of investigators have focused their attention on the relationship between the consumption of coffee and liver disease. Aim To examine the published literature to date in an attempt to establish the presence of an hepatoprotective effect of coffee. Methods Using PubMed, we identified published studies and review articles relating to the effect of coffee consumption on diseases of the liver. Conclusion A number of studies have reported the beneficial effects of coffee on abnormal liver biochemistry, cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. At the present time the mechanism of this effect remains unclear as does the ‘‘dose’’ required to achieve these benefits.
Patients who receive liver transplantation for chronic hepatitis B infection require long-term combination therapy with hepatitis B immunoglobulin (HBIG) and oral antiviral medication to prophylax against graft re-infection. This study examines the efficacy and patient preference of subcutaneous (SC) administration of HBIG in maintaining anti HBs titres > 100 IU/L.12 patients who were stable while receiving our standard IM HBIG protocol received an alternate formulation by SC injection, consisting of 10 mL (3120 IU) HBIG as 4 x 2.5 mL SC injections. SC injection were repeated as soon as titres reached 100-150 IU/mL during the 3 month study period. A questionnaire was administered upon study entry and exit to subjectively assess patient preference.Anti- HBs Cmax after first injection was 441.6 IU/L +/- 81.5, and Tmax was 7.1 +/- 3.2 days. SC injections were required every 56 days, which compared well to the frequency of required IM injections prior to study enrollment of 45 days. The patients mean ratings of pain on a 0-10 scale were 5 for the IM route and 1.6 for the SC route. All patients preferred the SC injections to the IM.SC administration of HBIG can effectively maintain anti HBs levels above the requisite 100 IU/L while substantially decreasing patient discomfort and improving patient satisfaction, and therefore becomes a very attractive alternative to IM HBIG injections. Further studies and wider use of SC HBIG based on this study may alter the standard practice of transplantation centers
