Strategies to prevent drug incompatibility during simultaneous multi-drug infusion in intensive care units: a literature review

A Survey on Handling and Administration of Therapeutic Protein Products in German and Swiss Hospitals

Protein products in hospitals often have to be compounded before administration to the patient. This may comprise reconstitution of lyophilizates, dilution, storage, and transport. However, the operations for compounding and administration in the hospital may lead to changes in product quality and possibly even impact patient safety. We surveyed healthcare practitioners from three clinical units using a questionnaire and open dialogue to document common procedures and their justification and to document differences in handling procedures. The survey covered dose compounding, transportation, storage and administration. One key observation was that drug vial optimization procedures were used for some products, e.g., use of one single-use vial for several patients. This included the use of spikes and needles or closed system transfer devices (CSTDs). Filters or light protection aids were used only when specified by the manufacturer. A further observation was a different handling of the overfill in pre-filled infusion containers, possibly impacting total dose. Lastly, we documented the complexity of infusion administration setups for administration of multiple drugs. In this case, flushing procedures or the placement and use of filters in the setup vary. Our study has revealed important differences in handling and administration practice. We propose that drug developers and hospitals should collaborate to establish unified handling procedures.

Drug compatibility with various closed intravenous infusion containers

Objective: The aim was to systematically compare the drug compatibility with various closed intravenous (i.v.) infusion containers, to provide a reference for selecting a relatively superior infusion container and improve the medication safety for patients in clinical practice. Methods: The compatibility of four commonly used clinical injections (ceftazidime, pantoprazole sodium, ambroxol hydrochloride, edaravone) with three representative closed i. v. infusion containers (non-PVC infusion bags, upright polypropylene infusion bags, inner sealed polypropylene infusion bags) prefilled with infusion fluids (0.9% sodium chloride or 5% dextrose) in the Chinese market were investigated in this study. The particle counts of both infusion fluids and diluted chemical injections by infusion fluids in various infusion containers were determined by the light obscuration method. At 0, 2 and 6 h after four injections following dilution with infusion fluids in each container, the pH of the solutions was detected, and the physical properties were examined by visual inspection. Meanwhile, the drug concentrations were assessed by high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Results: As for either infusion fluids or diluted injections by infusion fluids, the particle counts in non-PVC infusion bags were significantly greater than those in the other two bags under some circumstances. The particle counts in diluted injections by infusion fluids increased dramatically compared with those in infusion fluids in all infusion containers, especially for the small-size particles. But pH, physical properties and drug concentrations of diluted infusion solutions in all infusion containers remained nearly unchanged over the test period. Conclusion: Closed i. v. infusion containers included in this study are all well-compatible with four injections. Moreover, the closed infusion containers produced by Chinese manufacturers have met the international quality standard. Particularly, the intravenous admixture preparation process needs to be optimized to reduce the overall particulate contaminants.

Evaluation of Strategies for Reducing Vancomycin-Piperacillin/Tazobactam Incompatibility

BACKGROUND

Drug incompatibility is defined as a physical-chemical reaction between two or more injectable drugs and that results mainly in precipitation or insolubility. Several strategies for reducing incompatibilities have been implemented empirically in intensive care units. However, these strategies have never been compared directly (and particularly in terms of the particulate load and drug mass flow rate) under standardized conditions. The objective of the present in vitro study was to evaluate the impact of various strategies for preventing incompatibility between simultaneously infused vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam.

METHODS

An in-line filter, a dilute vancomycin solution (5 mg/mL), and an alternative saline administration line were evaluated separately. The infusion line outlet was connected to a dynamic particle counter. The antibiotic concentration was measured in an HPLC-UV assay.

RESULT

The use of an in-line filter and an alternative saline administration route did not significantly reduce the particulate load caused by vancomycin-piperacillin/tazobactam incompatibility. Dilution of the vancomycin solution was associated with a significantly lower particulate load and maintenance of the vancomycin mass flow rate.

DISCUSSION

It is important to systematically compare the efficacy of strategies for preventing drug incompatibility. The use of diluted vancomycin solution gave the best results in the case of vancomycin-piperacillin/tazobactam incompatibility.

Nursing strategies for the mechanically ventilated patient

The goal of this manuscript is to provide a comprehensive and multi-disciplinary review of the best nursing practices of caring for mechanically ventilated patients. By reviewing human medicine literature, the authors will extrapolate procedures that have been found to be most effective in reducing the risk of mechanical ventilation (MV) complications. Paired with review of the current standards in veterinary medicine, the authors will compile the best practice information on mechanically ventilated patient care, which will serve as a detailed resource for the veterinary nursing staff. Written from a nursing standpoint, this manuscript aims to consolidate the nursing assessment of a mechanically ventilated patient, addressing both systemic and physical changes that may be encountered during hospitalization. The goal of this review article is to present information that encourages a proactive approach to nursing care by focusing on understanding the effects of polypharmacy, hemodynamic changes associated with MV, complications of recumbent patient care, and sources of hospital acquired infections. When applied in conjunction with the more technical aspects of MV, this manuscript will allow veterinary technicians involved in these cases to understand the dynamic challenges that mechanically ventilated patients present, provide guidance to mitigate risk, address issues quickly and effectively, and create an up-to date standard of practice that can be implemented.

Simultaneous infusion of two incompatible antibiotics: Impact of the choice of infusion device and concomitant simulated fluid volume support on the particulate load and the drug mass flow rates

Vancomycin and piperacillin/tazobactam are known to be incompatible. The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the impact of their simultaneous infusion on mass flow rates and particulate load and identify preventive strategies. We assessed both static conditions and a reproduction of an infusion line used in a hospital's critical care unit. A high-performance liquid chromatography/UV diode array system and static and dynamic laser diffraction particle counters were used. The mass flow rates were primarily influenced by the choice of the infusion device and the presence of simulated fluid volume support. Drug incompatibility also appeared to affect vancomycin's mass flow rate, and the dynamic particulate load increased during flow rate changes - especially in the infusion set with a large common volume line and no concomitant simulated fluid volume support. Only discontinuation of the piperacillin/tazobactam infusion was associated with a higher particulate load in the infusion set with a large common volume line and no concomitant simulated fluid volume support. A low common volume line and the use of simulated fluid volume support were associated with smaller fluctuations in the mass flow rate. The clinical risk associated with a higher particulate load must now be assessed.