Effects of i.v. push administration on β-lactam pharmacodynamics

Intravenous push antibiotics in the emergency department: Education and implementation

PURPOSE

Intravenous push antibiotics can serve as an alternative to intravenous piggyback antibiotics while providing the same pharmacodynamics and adverse effect profile, easing shortage pressures and decreasing order to administration time, as well as representing a potential cost savings. The purpose of this study was to determine whether intravenous push antibiotics could decrease the time from an order to the start of administration compared to piggyback antibiotics in emergency departments. This study also measured the cost savings of antibiotic preparation and administration and assessed nursing satisfaction when using intravenous push antibiotics.

METHODS

Sample instances of use of intravenous push and piggyback antibiotics were identified. Patients were included if they were 18 years of age or older and received at least a single dose of intravenous push or piggyback ceftriaxone, cefepime, cefazolin, or meropenem in one of the institution's emergency departments. The primary outcome of the study was to compare the time from the order to the start of administration of intravenous push vs piggyback antibiotics. The secondary outcome was to compare the cost of antibiotic preparation for the 2 methods.

RESULTS

The intravenous push and piggyback groups each had 43 patients. The time from the order to the start of administration decreased from 74 (interquartile range, 29-114) minutes in the piggyback group to 31 (interquartile range, 21-52) minutes in the push group (P = 0.003). When the estimated monthly cost savings for ceftriaxone, cefepime, and meropenem were added together, across the emergency departments, an estimated $227,930.88 is saved per year when using intravenous push antibiotics.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous push antibiotics decrease the time from ordering to the start of administration and result in significant cost savings.

Beta-Lactam Probability of Target Attainment Success: Cefepime as a Case Study

Introduction: Probability of target attainment (PTA) analysis using Monte Carlo simulations has become a mainstay of dose optimization. We highlight the technical and clinical factors that may affect PTA for beta-lactams. Methods: We performed a mini review in adults to explore factors relating to cefepime PTA success and how researchers incorporate PTA into dosing decisions. In addition, we investigated, via simulations with a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model, factors that may affect cefepime PTA success. Results: The mini review included 14 articles. PTA results were generally consistent, given the differences in patient populations. However, dosing recommendations were more varied and appeared to depend on the definition of pharmacodynamic (PD) target, definition of PTA success and specific clinical considerations. Only 3 of 14 articles performed formal toxicological analysis. Simulations demonstrated that the largest determinants of cefepime PTA were the choice of PD target, continuous vs. intermittent infusion and creatinine clearance. Assumptions for protein binding, steady state vs. first dose, and simulating different sampling schemes may impact PTA success under certain conditions. The choice of one or two compartments had a minimal effect on PTA. Conclusions: PTA results may be similar with different assumptions and techniques. However, dose recommendation may differ significantly based on the selection of PD target, definition of PTA success and considerations specific to a patient population. Demographics and the PK parameters used to simulate time-concentration profiles should be derived from patient data applicable to the purpose of the PTA. There should be strong clinical rationale for dose selection. When possible, safety and toxicity should be considered in addition to PTA success.

Pushing the agenda for intravenous push administration in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy

Intravenous push (IVP) antimicrobial administration refers to rapid bolus infusion of medication. This drug delivery method offers improved patient convenience, superior patient and nursing satisfaction, and cost savings when used in outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT). Antimicrobial agents must demonstrate optimal physiochemical and pharmacologic characteristics, as well as sufficient syringe stability, to be administered in this manner. Additionally, impacts on medication tolerability, patient safety, and effectiveness must be considered. This narrative review summarizes the available data and practical implications of IVP administration of antimicrobials in the OPAT setting.

Implementation of IV Push Antibiotics for Outpatients During a National Fluid Shortage Following Hurricane Maria

Background

Prior to the introduction of intravenous (IV) drip infusion, most IV drugs were delivered in a syringe bolus push. However, intravenous drip infusions subsequently became the standard of care. Puerto Rico is the largest supplier of IV fluid bags and in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria, there was a nationwide fluid bag shortage. This shortage required stewardship measures to maintain the operation of the self-administered outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy (OPAT) program at Parkland Health.

Methods

Parkland pharmacists evaluated all self-administered antimicrobials for viability of administration as an IV syringe bolus push (IVP) instead of an IV-drip infusion. Medications deemed appropriate were transitioned to IVP. The hospital EMR was used to identify patients discharged to the OPAT clinic using all methods of parenteral drug delivery. Data was collected for patient demographics, patient satisfaction, and clinical outcomes. Finally cost of care was calculated for IVP and IV drip administration.

Results

One-hundred and thirteen self-administered IVP and 102 self-administered IV drip treatment courses were identified during the study period. Individuals using IVP had a statistically significant decrease in hospital length of stay. Patient satisfaction was greater with IVP and IVP saved 504 liters of normal saline resulting in a savings of $43,652 over 6 months. The 30-day readmission rate and mortality were similar.

Conclusion

The abrupt IV fluid shortage following a natural disaster led to implementation of a high value care model that improved efficiency, reduced costs, and did not affect safety or efficacy.

Evaluation of Intravenous Push Piperacillin-Tazobactam on Time to Antibiotic Administration in Emergency Department Patients with Sepsis

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine if intravenous push (IVP) administration of piperacillin-tazobactam reduced the time to antibiotic administration compared to intravenous piggyback (IVPB) in emergency department (ED) patients who present with sepsis. Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients with sepsis who received piperacillin-tazobactam before and after implementation of an IVPB to IVP conversion protocol. Results: A total of 486 charts were reviewed and the final analysis included 127 patients in each group. The mean time to administration of piperacillin-tazobactam was 67 (± 48) minutes and 58 (± 36) minutes in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively (P = NS). The time to administration of secondary antibiotics was reduced by 38 minutes in patients who received piperacillin-tazobactam by IVP (105 min ±69 vs 67 min ±37; P < .001). Nurse administration time was reduced by 11 min for piperacillin-tazobactam (54 min ±46 vs 43 min ±33; P = .034) and 40 min for secondary antibiotics (90 min ±67 vs 50 min ±32; P = < .001) in the IVP group. There was no difference in hypersensitivity reactions, hospital length of stay, or mortality. Conclusion: Conversion from piperacillin-tazobactam IVPB to IVP was associated with a reduction in time to piperacillin-tazobactam and secondary antibiotic administration in emergency department patients with sepsis. Further prospective research is needed to evaluate clinical outcomes associated with IVP administration.

Pharmacy in Flight: Impact of Clinical Pharmacist in Prehospital Care

Critical care and emergency medicine pharmacists play vital roles in the hospital setting but have historically had limited involvement in prehospital emergency services. The Mississippi Center for Emergency Services added a critical care pharmacist to the interprofessional prehospital team. This article characterizes the role of the prehospital clinical pharmacist.

Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Target Attainment in Adult and Pediatric Patients Following Administration of Ceftaroline Fosamil as a 5-Minute Infusion

The key pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) efficacy index for β-lactam antibiotics is the percentage of time that free drug concentrations exceed the minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) of bacteria during each dosing interval (fT>MIC). Ceftaroline fosamil, the prodrug of the β-lactam ceftaroline, was initially approved for administration as 60-minute intravenous (IV) infusions. Population PK analyses comparing exposure and PK/PD target attainment for 5-minute and 60-minute IV infusions, described here, have supported ceftaroline fosamil labeling updates to include variable infusion durations of 5 to 60 minutes in adults and children aged ≥2 months. A 2-compartment disposition PK model for ceftaroline fosamil and ceftaroline was used to predict steady-state ceftaroline exposures (maximum plasma concentrations [Cmax,ss ] and area under the plasma concentration-time curve over 24 hours [AUCss,0-24 ]) and probability of target attainment in simulated adult and pediatric patients with various degrees of renal function receiving standard doses of ceftaroline fosamil as 5-minute or 60-minute IV infusions. Across age groups and renal function categories, median ceftaroline AUCss,0-24 values were similar for 5-minute and 60-minute infusions, whereas Cmax,ss was up to 42% higher for 5-minute infusions. Both infusion durations achieved >99% probability of target attainment based on PK/PD targets for Staphylococcus aureus (35% fT>MIC) and Streptococcus pneumoniae (44% fT>MIC) at European Committee on Antimicrobial Susceptibility Testing/Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute MIC breakpoints (1 mg/L and 0.25/0.5 mg/L, respectively). These findings support administration of standard ceftaroline fosamil doses over 5 to 60 minutes for adults and children aged ≥2 months, providing added flexibility to clinicians and patients.

Evaluation of First-Dose, Intravenous Push Penicillins and Carbapenems in the Emergency Department

BACKGROUND

Early appropriate antibiotic administration is associated with improved outcomes in infectious illnesses. During drug shortages in 2017, the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists recommended intravenous push (IVP) administration of medications when possible to conserve small-volume parenteral solutions. Data supporting IVP penicillins and carbapenems was limited.

OBJECTIVE

The primary objective of this study compared time from patient emergency department (ED) arrival to antibiotic administration between IVP and intravenous piggy-back (IVPB) administration.

METHODS

This single-center pre-post protocol study assessed changes in administration timing and safety of ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ertapenem from 2015-2018. Medication administration by IVPB (pre) or IVP (post), ED arrival, antibiotic order and administration times, potential effectors of administration time, and safety events were assessed. Acquisition costs were estimated.

RESULTS

A total of 696 administrations were included, with 351 and 345 subjects in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively. The median time from ED arrival to initiation of antibiotic administration was 140 (IQR 87-221) minutes and 110 (IQR 68-181) minutes in the IVPB and IVP cohorts, respectively, (P < 0.01). IVP administration increased the proportion of indexed antibiotics administered within 60 minutes of ED arrival compared to IVPB (20% vs. 12%, respectively, P < 0.01). There was no difference in adverse events between both cohorts. Supply acquisition cost savings totaled an more than $5,000 with the IVP protocol.

CONCLUSION

IVP administration of ampicillin/sulbactam, piperacillin/tazobactam, and ertapenem improved times to initiation of empiric, first-dose antibiotics in the ED without an increase in adverse events, saving over $5,000 annually.

Intravenous push versus intravenous piggyback beta-lactams for the empiric management of gram-negative bacteremia

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

Nationwide shortages of small-volume parenteral solutions (SVPS) compelled hospitals to develop strategies including the use of intravenous push (IVP) administration of antibiotics to reserve SVPS for absolute necessities. It is unknown if administration of beta-lactam antibiotics (BL) via IVP results in worse clinical outcomes compared to intravenous piggyback (IVPB) due to the potential inability to achieve pharmacodynamic targets.

METHODS

Our health-system implemented a mandatory IVP action plan for BL from October 2017 to September 2018. This was a retrospective study of adult patients with GNB who received empiric therapy with IVPB (30 minutes) or IVP (5 minutes) cefepime (FEP) or meropenem (MEM) for at least 2 days. Endpoints included clinical response, microbiological clearance and mortality. All data are presented as n (%) or median (interquartile range).

RESULTS

The final cohort included 213 patients (IVPB n = 105, IVP n = 108). The primary source of bacteremia was urinary, with Escherichia coli being the primary pathogen. Escalation of therapy was similar between groups (15 [14%] vs 11 [10%], P = .36) at a median of 3 days (P = .68). No significant differences were observed in any secondary endpoints including microbiological clearance, bacteremia recurrence, time to defervescence, WBC normalization, vasopressor duration or in-hospital mortality.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

Our findings suggest no differences in clinical response with the use of IVP compared to IVPB FEP and MEM for treatment of GNB. This form of administration may be considered as a fluid conservation strategy in times of shortage.

A Cluster of Cefepime-induced Neutropenia During Outpatient Parenteral Antimicrobial Therapy

A cluster of cefepime-induced neutropenia (CIN) was identified from June 2017 to May 2018 in a regional outpatient parenteral antimicrobial therapy population. Our data suggest prolonged courses of cefepime (≥2 weeks), administered by rapid intravenous push, were associated with a higher risk of CIN.

Safety and tolerability of i.v. push piperacillin/tazobactam within an emergency department

PURPOSE

Piperacillin/tazobactam is a broad-spectrum antibiotic that is widely used and commonly administered via the intravenous (i.v.) piggyback route over 0.5 to 4.0 hours. Recommendations for i.v. push (IVP) administration of piperacillin/tazobactam are lacking due to the high osmolality of the solution. The primary objective of this study was to retrospectively assess the safety and tolerability of piperacillin/tazobactam administered peripherally by IVP. Methods. A retrospective chart review was conducted to evaluate adverse drug reactions after administration of a single dose of IVP piperacillin/tazobactam through a peripheral line in an emergency department from August 2016 through November 2017.

RESULTS

A total of 1,813 patients received 1 dose of IVP piperacillin/tazobactam during the study timeframe. Three hundred patients were randomly selected for assessment of safety and tolerability. Two hundred ninety-nine patients (99.7%) tolerated IVP piperacillin/tazobactam. One patient had an allergic reaction that included itching and hives. No infusion-related reactions were documented.

CONCLUSION

IVP administration of piperacillin/tazobactam through a peripheral site is safe and tolerable for adult patients.

Safety of intravenous push administration of beta-lactams within a healthcare system

PURPOSE

A critical shortage of small-volume parenteral solutions in late 2017 led hospitals to develop strategies to ensure availability for critical patients, including administration of antibiotics as intravenous push (IVP). Minimal literature has been published to date that assesses the safety of administration of beta-lactams via this route. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety of IVP administration of select beta-lactam antibiotics.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of IVP administrations of aztreonam, ceftriaxone, cefepime, and meropenem at two campuses of the New York University Langone Health system after October 2017. Patients receiving surgical prophylaxis or more than one IVP antibiotic simultaneously were excluded. The primary endpoint was adverse events (ADE) following IVP administration of antibiotics.

RESULTS

We evaluated 1000 patients who received IVP aztreonam (n = 43), ceftriaxone (n = 544), cefepime (n = 368) or meropenem (n = 45). There were 10 (1%) ADE observed, 5 of which were allergic reactions. Four ADE were neurotoxicity related to IVP cefepime. Based on the Naranjo score, 1 adverse event was "probably" and 3 were "possibly" related to cefepime IVP administration. Lastly, only 1 report of phlebitis was observed with the use of IVP ceftriaxone.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of IVP as an alternative to intravenous piggyback (IVPB) during times of drug shortage for select beta-lactam antibiotics appears to be safe, and ADE are similar to those previously described for IVPB administration. Future studies evaluating clinical outcomes between IVP and IVPB administration may be of benefit.

Intravenous Push Administration of Antibiotics: Literature and Considerations

Intravenous (IV) push administration can provide clinical and practical advantages over longer IV infusions in multiple clinical scenarios, including in the emergency department, in fluid-restricted patients, and when supplies of diluents are limited. In these settings, conversion to IV push administration may provide a solution. This review compiles available data on IV push administration of antibiotics in adults, including preparation, stability, and administration instructions. Prescribing information, multiple tertiary drug resources, and primary literature were consulted to compile relevant data. Several antibiotics are Food and Drug Administration-approved for IV push administration, including many beta-lactams. In addition, cefepime, ceftriaxone, ertapenem, gentamicin, and tobramycin have primary literature data to support IV push administration. While amikacin, ciprofloxacin, imipenem/cilastatin, and metronidazole have limited primary literature data on IV push administration, available data do not support that route. In addition, a discussion on practical considerations, such as IV push best practices and pharmacodynamic considerations, is provided.