Evaluation of costs accrued through inadvertent continuation of hospital-initiated proton pump inhibitor therapy for stress ulcer prophylaxis beyond hospital discharge: a retrospective chart review

Timely Cessation of Proton Pump Inhibitors in Critically Ill Patients Impacts Morbidity and Mortality: A Propensity Score-Matched Cohort Study

OBJECTIVE

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are among the drugs most commonly used in critically ill patients. Although mainly applied temporarily for stress ulcer prophylaxis, their application is frequently not terminated. Potential adverse effects of PPI treatment could impact the outcome in case of unnecessary and, therefore, avoidable long-term continuation. We tested the hypotheses that nonindicated PPI therapy continued beyond hospital discharge is associated with increased morbidity, rehospitalization rate, and mortality.

DESIGN

Nationwide retrospective cohort study considering critically ill patients treated on German ICUs between January, 2017, and December, 2018 with a 2-year follow-up.

SETTING

A total of 591,207 patient datasets of a German healthcare insurer were screened.

PATIENTS

We identified 11,576 ICU patients who received PPI therapy for the first time during their index ICU stay without having an indication for its continuation.

INTERVENTIONS

The cohort was stratified into two groups: 1) patients without further PPI therapy and 2) patients with continuation of PPI therapy beyond 8 weeks after hospital discharge.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Frequency of predescribed adverse events associated with PPI therapy, 1-year rehospitalization rate, and 2-year mortality were determined. The proportion of patients with continued PPI therapy without an objectifiable indication was 41.7% (4,825 of 11,576 patients). These patients had a 27% greater risk of pneumonia (odds ratio [OR] 1.27; 95% CI, 1.15-1.39; p < 0.001) and a 17% greater risk of cardiovascular events (OR 1.17; 95% CI, 1.08-1.26; p < 0.001). Continued PPI therapy was associated with a 34% greater risk of rehospitalization (OR 1.34; 95% CI, 1.23-1.47) and a nearly 20% greater 2-year mortality risk (hazard ratio 1.17; 95% CI, 1.08-1.27; p = 0.006).

CONCLUSIONS

These data demonstrate that an unnecessary continuation of PPI therapy after hospital discharge may significantly impact morbidity and mortality. To avoid potentially harmful overuse of a PPIs, intensivists should ensure timely cessation of a temporarily indicated PPI therapy.

An International, Multicenter Evaluation of Comprehensive Medication Management by Pharmacists in ICU Recovery Centers

BACKGROUND

Post-intensive care syndrome (PICS) is defined as a new or worsening impairment in physical, cognitive, or mental health following critical illness. Intensive care unit recovery centers (ICU-RC) are one means to treat patients who have PICS. The purpose of this study is to describe the role of pharmacists in ICU-RCs.

RESEARCH QUESTION

What is the number and type of medication interventions made by a pharmacist at an ICU-RC at 12 different centers?

STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS

This prospective, observational study was conducted in 12 intensive care units (ICUs)/ICU-RCs between September 2019 and July 2021. A full medication review was conducted by a pharmacist on patients seen at the ICU-RC.

RESULTS

507 patients were referred to the ICU-RC. Of these patients, 474 attended the ICU-RC and 472 had a full medication review performed by a pharmacist. Baseline demographic and hospital course data were obtained from the electronic health record and at the ICU-RC appointment. Pharmacy interventions were made in 397 (84%) patients. The median number of pharmacy interventions per patient was 2 (interquartile range [IQR] = 1,3). Medications were stopped and started in 124 (26%) and 91 (19%) patients, respectively. The number of patients that had a dose decreased and a dose increased was 51 (11%) and 43 (9%), respectively. There was no difference in the median total number of medications that the patient was prescribed at the start and end of the patient visit (10, IQR = 5, 15). Adverse drug event (ADE) preventive measures were implemented in 115 (24%) patients. ADE events were identified in 69 (15%) patients. Medication interactions were identified in 30 (6%) patients.

INTERPRETATION

A pharmacist plays an integral role in an ICU-RC resulting in the identification, prevention, and treatment of medication-related problems. This paper should serve as a call to action on the importance of the inclusion of a pharmacist in ICU-RC clinics.

Medication-related problems in critical care survivors: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

There are numerous, often single centre discussions of assorted medication-related problems after hospital discharge in patients who survive critical illness. However, there has been little synthesis of the incidence of medication-related problems, the classes of medications most often studied, the factors that are associated with greater patient risk of such problems or interventions that can prevent them.

METHODS

We undertook a systematic review to understand medication management and medication problems in critical care survivors in the hospital discharge period. We searched OVID Medline, Embase, PsychINFO, CINAHL and the Cochrane database (2001-2022). Two reviewers independently screened publications to identify studies that examined medication management at hospital discharge or thereafter in critical care survivors. We included randomised and non-randomised studies. We extracted data independently and in duplicate. Data extracted included medication type, medication-related problems and frequency of medication issues, alongside demographics such as study setting. Cohort study quality was assessed using the Newcastle Ottowa Score checklist. Data were analysed across medication categories.

RESULTS

The database search initially retrieved 1180 studies; following the removal of duplicates and studies which did not fit the inclusion criteria, 47 papers were included. The quality of studies included varied. The outcomes measured and the timepoints at which data were captured also varied, which impacted the quality of data synthesis. Across the studies included, we found that as many as 80% of critically ill patients experienced medication-related problems in the posthospital discharge period. These issues included inappropriate continuation of newly prescribed drugs such as antipsychotics, gastrointestinal prophylaxis and analgesic medications, as well as inappropriate discontinuation of chronic disease medications, such as secondary prevention cardiac drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Following critical illness, a high proportion of patients experience problems with their medications. These changes were present across multiple health systems. Further research is required to understand optimal medicine management across the full recovery trajectory of critical illness.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021255975.

Postoperative Proton Pump Inhibitors are associated with a significantly higher rate of delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy

BACKGROUND

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are effective in reducing marginal ulcers after pancreatoduodenectomy. However, their impact on perioperative complications has not been defined.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the effect of postoperative PPIs on 90-day perioperative outcomes in all patients who underwent pancreatoduodenectomy at our institution from April 2017 to December 2020.

RESULTS

284 patients were included; 206 (72.5%) received perioperative PPIs, 78 (27.5%) did not. The two cohorts were similar in demographics and operative variables. Postoperatively, the PPI cohort had significantly higher rates of overall complications (74.3% vs. 53.8%) and delayed gastric emptying (28.6% vs. 11.5%), p < 0.05. However, no differences in infectious complications, postoperative pancreatic fistula, or anastomotic leaks were seen. On multivariate analysis, PPI was independently associated with a higher risk of overall complications (OR 2.46, CI 1.33-4.54) and delayed gastric emptying (OR 2.73, CI 1.26-5.91), p = 0.011. Four patients developed marginal ulcers within 90-days postoperatively; all were in the group who received PPIs.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative proton pump inhibitor use was associated with a significantly higher rate of overall complications and delayed gastric emptying after pancreatoduodenectomy.

Clinical Intervention Increases Rational Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors in the General Surgery Department

This study aimed to evaluate the role of the clinical pharmacist in the rational use of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in a general surgery department. All enrolled patients had attended the general surgery department of a tertiary hospital. This single-center prospective study compared differences in the overall rate of rational PPI use, proportion of unindicated PPI use, utilization rate, average defined daily dose (DDD), drug costs, PPI costs, and cost-effectiveness of clinical pharmacist intervention between the intervention (538 cases) and control (536 cases) groups. In the intervention group, Pareto and fishbone diagram analyses were combined with the Plan-Do-Check-Act cycle; Statistical Package for the Social Sciences was used for analyzing all data. The overall rate of rational PPI use was significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.01). The proportion of unindicated PPI use, utilization rate, average DDD, drug costs, and PPI costs were significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (p < 0.05). Cost-effectiveness analysis for the overall rate of rational PPI use indicated a positive impact of intervention, with economic benefits in the intervention group. Clinical pharmacist intervention for rational use of PPIs in general surgery departments could significantly increase the overall rate of rational PPI use; it could also reduce the proportion of unindicated PPI use, utilization rates, average DDDs, drug costs, and PPIs costs. Pharmacist intervention also offers economic benefits by improving the overall rate of rational PPI use.

Indications for the Use of Proton Pump Inhibitors for Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis and Peptic Ulcer Bleeding in Hospitalized Patients

Proton pump inhibitors are widely used throughout the world for the treatment of gastrointestinal disorders that are related to acid secretion, such as peptic ulcer disease and dyspepsia. Another common indication for proton pump inhibitors is stress ulcer prophylaxis. Proton pump inhibitors have proven efficacy for the treatment of acid-related gastrointestinal disorders, but there is concern that their use may be associated with the development of significant complications, such as fractures, Clostridium difficile infection, acute kidney injury, chronic kidney disease, and hypomagnesemia. Proton pump inhibitors are overused in the hospital setting, both for stress ulcer prophylaxis and gastrointestinal bleeding, and then they are often inappropriately continued after discharge from the hospital. This narrative review article outlines the evidence surrounding appropriate proton pump inhibitor use for stress ulcer prophylaxis and peptic ulcer bleeding.

A Retrospective Cohort Analysis of the Use of Enteral Nutrition Plus Pharmacologic Prophylaxis or Enteral Nutrition Alone

Background: Due to the risk of development of stress ulcers in intensive care unit (ICU) patients, pharmacologic prophylaxis is often utilized. However, some literature describes the use of enteral nutrition instead as stress ulcer prophylaxis. Methods: The purpose of this study is to determine if enteral nutrition is similar to pharmacologic stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) with enteral nutrition for reduction of gastrointestinal (GI) bleeding, perforation, or ulceration in ICU patients. This was a retrospective, single-center cohort study that took place at an academic medical center. Adult ICU patients receiving enteral nutrition who had a risk factor for stress-related mucosal damage were included. The primary outcome was the incidence of GI bleeding, perforation, or ulcer formation. Results: Overall, 167 patients were included in the study, 147 in the pharmacologic prophylaxis plus EN group (PPEN) and 20 in the enteral therapy only (EN) group. Of 167 patients included, 22 patients (21 in the PPEN group and 1 in the EN group) developed a primary outcome of GI bleeding, perforation, or ulceration (14.3% vs 5%, P = .4781). Patients in the PPEN group had a higher incidence of pneumonia (42.2% vs 15%, P = .0194), but no difference was seen between groups when patients with pneumonia present on admission were excluded (20.6% vs 10.5%, P = .5254). Conclusion: In this small cohort of patients, enteral nutrition alone is as effective as pharmacologic therapy in addition to enteral nutrition for the reduction of stress-related GI bleeding, perforation, and ulceration.

Prevalence and Risk Factors for Inappropriate Continuation of Proton Pump Inhibitors After Discharge From the Intensive Care Unit

OBJECTIVE

To determine the prevalence and risk factors for inappropriate discharge on proton pump inhibitor (PPI) therapy started in the intensive care unit (ICU) for stress ulcer prophylaxis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of adults initiated on treatment with a PPI in any of 9 affiliated ICUs from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2018. Patients were excluded if they had an appropriate long-term PPI indication. Logistic regression modeling was used to identify characteristics associated with discharge on treatment with an inappropriate PPI.

RESULTS

Of 24,751 patients admitted to an ICU, 4127 were initiated on treatment with a new PPI, with 2467 (60%) lacking a long-term PPI indication. Of these 2467, a total of 1122 (45%) were continued on PPI therapy after transfer to the floor and 668 (27%) were discharged on PPI therapy. On multivariable analysis, risk factors for inappropriate discharge on PPI therapy included having an upper endoscopy (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.70; 95% CI, 1.08-2.66), admission to the surgical compared with medical ICU (aOR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.32-3.10), and discharge to a nursing home or rehabilitation facility (aOR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.04-1.96; and aOR, 2.29; 95% CI, 1.62-3.24, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Among patients started on treatment with a PPI in the ICU without an indication for outpatient PPI use, 27% (668 of 2467) were nonetheless discharged on PPI therapy. Medically complex and surgical ICU patients are at increased risk for receiving PPIs without appropriate documented indications, and careful review of medication lists at discharge should occur in these high-risk groups.

Patients, Prescribers, and Institutional Factors Associated with Inappropriate Use of Acid Suppressive Therapy in Medical Wards: An Experience of a Single-Center in Saudi Arabia

PURPOSE

To identify factors associated with inappropriate acid-suppressive therapy (AST) use in hospitalized medical ward patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a combined retrospective cohort study reviewing the electronic medical records of medical ward in a secondary university hospital between January 2018 and July 2019, in addition to prescriber surveys about AST knowledge. We included adult patients (≥18 years old) admitted to the medical ward who received at least one dose of AST during their hospitalization. Statistical analyses included descriptive statistics and logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 335 patients were included. Most of the patients were female (66.6%), with a mean age of 42.37 ± 17.72 years; 76% (n=256) of the study subjects were prescribed AST for an inappropriate indication. Patients who were not receiving any home medications associated with high bleeding risk had higher odds of being prescribed AST inappropriately (OR, 4.06; 95% CI, 1.09-13.8). A total of 27 physicians completed the prescriber survey, and the average prescriber's knowledge score was 46.8 ± 15.6%. This score did not differ by the prescriber's position.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated the overuse of AST in the medical ward. Therefore, improving providers' awareness about AST and implementing an AST stewardship program in institutions is necessary to limit this long-lasting issue.

The Use and Misuse of Proton Pump Inhibitors: An Opportunity for Deprescribing

Proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) are proven medications of choice for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), acid-related disorders, erosive esophagitis, Barrett esophagus, prevention of gastrointestinal bleeding while on nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, eosinophilic esophagitis, peptic ulcer disease, stress ulcer prophylaxis in critically ill patients, and other indications. Best practice guidelines from several sources on the appropriate indications and duration of PPI therapy have been summarized for easy assimilation. Individualized decision with regard to PPI use is illustrated by case vignettes; best approaches are provided. The significant increase in use of PPIs for ill-defined indications over the years, associated adverse outcomes with long-term use, and consequent increase in health care costs have drawn much attention. Adverse outcomes due to PPI therapy may be categorized as unrelated or related to gastric acid inhibition. Examples of outcomes unrelated to acid inhibition include allergic reactions, acute interstitial nephritis, chronic kidney disease, poor cardiovascular outcomes, dementia, and drug interactions; consequences of acid inhibition include gastrointestinal infections, pneumonia, nutrient deficiencies, fractures, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, and small intestinal bacterial overgrowth. Provider awareness regarding best practice guidelines on PPI use and imparting pertinent education to patients may be the rational approach to safe and effective PPI therapy. In individuals in whom the drug is not indicated, efforts at deprescribing the PPI may be attempted following discussion with the patient. Approaches include stopping the drug, reducing the dose or using "on-demand" therapy after completing the course of treatment for the specific indication. Barriers to successful deprescribing exist. Follow-up is recommended for recurrence of manifestations; in the event of recurrence, the PPI may need to be re-instituted. PPIs are valuable, irreplaceable drugs in the prevention and treatment of certain disorders for specific durations of time. Evidence nevertheless suggests that excessive and inappropriately prolonged use of PPIs is associated with a broad range of adverse effects. Education of provider and patient, stewardship, and motivation are key to appropriate use of PPIs for the right indications. Key implications for practice are offered.

Gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis for critically ill patients: a clinical practice guideline

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the role of gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis (stress ulcer prophylaxis) in critically ill patients? This guideline was prompted by the publication of a new large randomised controlled trial.

CURRENT PRACTICE

Gastric acid suppression with proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) or histamine-2 receptor antagonists (H2RAs) is commonly done to prevent gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients. Existing guidelines vary in their recommendations of which population to treat and which agent to use.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This guideline panel makes a weak recommendation for using gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis in critically ill patients at high risk (>4%) of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding, and a weak recommendation for not using prophylaxis in patients at lower risk of clinically important bleeding (≤4%). The panel identified risk categories based on evidence, with variable certainty regarding risk factors. The panel suggests using a PPI rather than a H2RA (weak recommendation) and recommends against using sucralfate (strong recommendation).

HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED

A guideline panel including patients, clinicians, and methodologists produced these recommendations using standards for trustworthy guidelines and the GRADE approach. The recommendations are based on a linked systematic review and network meta-analysis. A weak recommendation means that both options are reasonable.

THE EVIDENCE

The linked systematic review and network meta-analysis estimated the benefit and harm of these medications in 12 660 critically ill patients in 72 trials. Both PPIs and H2RAs reduce the risk of clinically important bleeding. The effect is larger in patients at higher bleeding risk (those with a coagulopathy, chronic liver disease, or receiving mechanical ventilation but not enteral nutrition or two or more of mechanical ventilation with enteral nutrition, acute kidney injury, sepsis, and shock) (moderate certainty). PPIs and H2RAs might increase the risk of pneumonia (low certainty). They probably do not have an effect on mortality (moderate certainty), length of hospital stay, or any other important outcomes. PPIs probably reduce the risk of bleeding more than H2RAs (moderate certainty).

UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION

In most critically ill patients, the reduction in clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding from gastric acid suppressants is closely balanced with the possibility of pneumonia. Clinicians should consider individual patient values, risk of bleeding, and other factors such as medication availability when deciding whether to use gastrointestinal bleeding prophylaxis. Visual overviews provide the relative and absolute benefits and harms of the options in multilayered evidence summaries and decision aids available on MAGICapp.

The inappropriate use of proton pump inhibitors during admission and after discharge: a prospective cross-sectional study

Background Proton pump inhibitors are often inappropriately prescribed during hospital admission and after discharge. The inappropriate prescription may be associated with increased and unnecessary healthcare costs. Objective To determine the prevalence of inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors during hospital admission and after discharge at Thailand's largest national tertiary referral center. Setting Medicine wards at Siriraj Hospital (Bangkok, Thailand) during September 2016 to September 2017. Method This prospective observational cross-sectional study in hospitalized patients who were prescribed, or who were already taking proton pump inhibitors. Medical records were reviewed to determine whether proton pump inhibitors were prescribed at discharge and at the 1-month follow-up. Main outcome measure Prevalence of inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors during hospital admission and after discharge, indication of inappropriate prescription. Results Two hundred and sixty-five patients (mean age: 65.8 ± 18.3 years, 50.9% men) were included. Approximately half of patients had proton pump inhibitor treatment initiated in the hospital, and the other 50.6% started treatment earlier. Among all patients, 50.6% were inappropriately prescribed proton pump inhibitors, in which 79.1% resulted from invalid indications. Fifty-two percent and 47.3% of patients who were prescribed proton pump inhibitors at discharge and at the 1-month follow-up had no indications for them. Gastrointestinal ulcer prophylaxis in low-risk patients was the most commonly observed incorrect indication. Aspirin (p = 0.030) and corticosteroids (p = 0.038) were both found to be significantly associated with the inappropriate prescription of proton pump inhibitors. The estimated cost of inappropriate use among inpatients and outpatients was $118,659 and $214,663 per year, respectively. Conclusion Proton pump inhibitors are excessively and inappropriately prescribed during hospital admission and after discharge in Thailand. The cost of this overprescribing is excessive and needs to be controlled.

Impact of a multidisciplinary quality improvement initiative to reduce inappropriate usage of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalized patients

AIMS

To promote effective methods to improve overutilization patterns of acid-suppressive therapy in hospitalized patients and to evaluate the impact of multidisciplinary team efforts to reduce inappropriate use of stress ulcer prophylaxis in low-risk patients.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary quality improvement initiative incorporating education, medication use reviews and reconciliation, and pharmaceutical intervention was implemented in June 2018 for surgical patients hospitalized via emergency department. For the pre-post analysis and time series analysis, patients admitted during April and May were classified into the pre-intervention cohort and those admitted during July and August into the post-intervention cohort.

RESULTS

Three hundred and seventeen patients were included in this study (153 and 164 in the pre- and post-intervention cohorts, respectively). The multidisciplinary program was effective in reducing overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis and healthcare expenses associated with it. Biweekly education on risk factors warranting stress ulcer prophylaxis was provided for clinicians, and acid-suppressive therapy was removed from a preset list of admission orders. The incidence of inappropriate prophylaxis use declined substantially following intervention in overall patients (OR = 0.51, P = 0.01) and a significant decrease was primarily observed among non-ICU patients (OR = 0.50, P = 0.01). Interrupted time series analysis confirmed the significant decline in inappropriate use post intervention (coefficient = -0.63, P < 0.001). The total healthcare expenses associated with such overuse decreased by 58.5% from US$ 19.39 to US$ 8.04 per 100 patient-days.

CONCLUSIONS

Our multidisciplinary team efforts were associated with improvement in stress ulcer prophylaxis overuse patterns, resulting in a substantial decrease in the incidence of inappropriate use, especially in general wards, and associated healthcare costs.

Assessment of pharmacologic prophylaxis use against stress ulcer in the medical wards of University of Gondar Hospital

Background

Critically ill patients with moderate-to-severe physiologically stressful event are at high risk of developing stress ulcers. The use of pharmacological prophylaxis significantly reduces the incidence of stress ulcer in high-risk patients.

Objective

The aim of this study was to assess the use of pharmacological prophylaxis for stress ulcer in the medical wards of University of Gondar Hospital.

Methods

A cross-sectional study design was used. In total, 234 patients were selected through simple random sampling technique. The risk of stress ulcer development was assessed using Evidence-Based Medicine Guideline for stress ulcer prepared by Orlando Regional Medical Center. SPSS version 21 was used for data analysis.

Result

The most common acute risk factor to stress ulcer was coagulopathy (18.4%), followed by hypoperfusion (9.8%). The concomitant non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug use (16.7%), mild-to-moderate brain or spinal cord injury (11.1%), and concomitant or recent corticosteroid use (9.4%) were frequently seen risk factors that necessitate administration of a prophylaxis. In total, 82 (35%) study participants were given stress ulcer prophylaxis, among which 52 (63.4%) were given without indication. The most commonly used drug class in the prevention of stress ulcer was proton pump inhibitors (76/82, 92.7%). In total, 43 (18.4%) study subjects were not given stress ulcer prophylaxis while there was clear indication. Patients with a long hospital stay and a diagnosis of central nervous system disorders had significant risk for inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis use.

Conclusion

In this study, inappropriate use of prophylaxis for stress ulcer was common. The higher proportion of inappropriateness was due to the use of stress ulcer prophylaxis while there was no enough indication. We recommend future researchers to assess the cost and impact of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis use, and the physicians should be adherent to the standard guidelines.

Evaluation of Adherence to American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Guidelines: Stress Ulcer Prophylaxis in Shiraz, Iran

Overuse of stress ulcer prophylaxis has a considerable cost burden on patient and healthcare systems. This study aimed to determine the adherence level of stress ulcer prophylaxis use with American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelines in a teaching hospital in Shiraz, Iran. From March to September 2013, we enrolled all eligible patients admitted to the general medical wards of Shahid Faghihi Hospital, Shiraz, Iran. According to American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelines, patients who had at least one major or two minor risk factors for stress ulcers and received stress ulcer prophylaxis were labeled as adherent, others were considered nonadherent. During the study period, 441 patients enrolled, of which 257 (58.3%) were women. The mean ±SD age of patients was 54.7 ± 20 years. The mean ±SD length of hospital stay for patients was 11.3 ± 6 days. Overall, 354 patients (80.2%) received proton pump inhibitors as stress ulcer prophylaxis. There were 127 patients who properly received stress ulcer prophylaxis. Total adherence to American Society of Health-System Pharmacists guidelines in our hospital was 28.8%. We observed a high frequency of unnecessary use of stress ulcer prophylaxis in hospitalized, noncritically ill patients with inappropriate continuation after discharge.

Appropriateness in prescribing PPIs: A position paper of the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE) - Study section "Digestive Diseases in Primary Care"

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice about thirty years ago has greatly improved our therapeutic approach to acid-related diseases for their well-recognized efficacy and safety. Despite the well-defined indications, however, the use of PPIs continues to grow every year in both western and eastern countries and this phenomenon poses serious queries that include the onset of potential adverse effects and the increase in health care costs. The major reason explaining this worrying market expansion is the inappropriate use of PPIs. In order to re-establish a correct use of these effective drugs in daily clinical practice, the Italian Society of Gastroenterology (SIGE), nominated a panel of experts who reviewed the available clinical literature and produced a series of updated position statements on the use of PPIs in clinical practice.

Critical Care Pharmacists and Medication Management in an ICU Recovery Center

BACKGROUND

Many patients experience complications following critical illness; these are now widely referred to as post-intensive care syndrome (PICS). An interprofessional intensive care unit (ICU) recovery center (ICU-RC), also known as a PICS clinic, is one potential approach to promoting patient and family recovery following critical illness.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the role of an ICU-RC critical care pharmacist in identifying and treating medication-related problems among ICU survivors.

METHODS

A prospective, observational cohort study was conducted of all outpatient appointments of a tertiary care hospital's ICU-RC between July 2012 and December 2015. The pharmacist completed a full medication review, including medication reconciliation, interview, counseling, and resultant interventions, during the ICU-RC appointment.

RESULTS

Data from all completed ICU-RC visits were analyzed (n = 62). A full medication review was performed in 56 (90%) of these patients by the pharmacist. The median number of pharmacy interventions per patient was 4 (interquartile range = 2, 5). All 56 patients had at least 1 pharmacy intervention; 22 (39%) patients had medication(s) stopped at the clinic appointment, and 18 (32%) patients had new medication(s) started. The pharmacist identified 9 (16%) patients who had an adverse drug event (ADE); 18 (32%) patients had ADE preventive measures instituted. An influenza vaccination was administered to 13 (23%) patients despite an inpatient protocol to ensure influenza vaccination prior to discharge. A pneumococcal vaccination was administered to 2 (4%) patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of a critical care pharmacist resulted in the identification and treatment of multiple medication-related problems in an ICU-RC as well as implementation of preventive measures.

Acid-Suppressive Therapy and Risk of Infections: Pros and Cons

This narrative review summarises the benefits, risks and appropriate use of acid-suppressing drugs (ASDs), proton pump inhibitors and histamine-2 receptor antagonists, advocating a rationale balanced and individualised approach aimed to minimise any serious adverse consequences. It focuses on current controversies on the potential of ASDs to contribute to infections-bacterial, parasitic, fungal, protozoan and viral, particularly in the elderly, comprehensively and critically discusses the growing body of observational literature linking ASD use to a variety of enteric, respiratory, skin and systemic infectious diseases and complications (Clostridium difficile diarrhoea, pneumonia, spontaneous bacterial peritonitis, septicaemia and other). The proposed pathogenic mechanisms of ASD-associated infections (related and unrelated to the inhibition of gastric acid secretion, alterations of the gut microbiome and immunity), and drug-drug interactions are also described. Both probiotics use and correcting vitamin D status may have a significant protective effect decreasing the incidence of ASD-associated infections, especially in the elderly. Despite the limitations of the existing data, the importance of individualised therapy and caution in long-term ASD use considering the balance of benefits and potential harms, factors that may predispose to and actions that may prevent/attenuate adverse effects is evident. A six-step practical algorithm for ASD therapy based on the best available evidence is presented.

Proton Pump Inhibitors in Gastroesophageal Reflux Disease: Friend or Foe

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Proton pump inhibitor (PPI) use in gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) has been redefined, in light of recent advances highlighting GERD phenotypes that respond to PPIs, and fresh revelations of potential risks of long-term PPI therapy.

RECENT FINDINGS

Erosive esophagitis predicts excellent response to PPI therapy, but non-erosive reflux disease (NERD) with abnormal reflux parameters on ambulatory reflux monitoring also demonstrates a similar response. In contrast, response is suboptimal in the absence of abnormal reflux parameters. In this setting, if an alternate appropriate indication for PPI therapy does not coexist, risks may outweigh benefits of PPI therapy. Adverse events from long-term PPI therapy continue to be reported, most based on association rather than cause-and-effect. Appropriate indications need to be established before embarking on long-term PPI therapy. Future research will define true risks of long-term PPI therapy, and develop alternate management options for acid peptic diseases.

Immunosuppressive agents are associated with peptic ulcer bleeding

Peptic ulcer bleeding can be fatal. Non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs), corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents are administered for long-term usage. The present study assessed the association between peptic ulcer bleeding and administration of NSAIDs, corticosteroids and immunosuppressive agents. Furthermore, the efficacy of lowering the risk of peptic ulcer bleeding with proton pump inhibitors (PPI) and histamine 2 receptor antagonists (H2RA) was evaluated. Medical records were retrospectively analyzed for patients subjected to an upper gastrointestinal (GI) endoscopy performed at the National Hospital Organization Shimoshizu Hospital (Yotsukaido, Japan) from October 2014 to September 2015. During this period, a total of 1,023 patients underwent an upper GI endoscopy. A total of 1,023 patients, including 431 males (age, 68.1±12.9 years) and 592 females (age, 66.4±12.3 years), who had been administered NSAIDs, corticosteroids, immunosuppressive agents, PPIs and H2RAs, were respectively enrolled. Endoscopic findings of the patients were reviewed and their data were statistically analyzed. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine the odds ratio of peptic ulcer bleeding for each medication; immunosuppressive agents had an odds ratio of 5.83, which was larger than that for NSAIDs (4.77). The Wald test was applied to confirm the correlation between immunosuppressive agents and peptic ulcer bleeding. Furthermore, χ² tests were applied to the correlation between peptic ulcer bleeding and administration of PPIs or H2RAs. Immunosuppressive agents had the largest χ², and the P-value was 0.03. Administration of PPIs was significantly correlated with non-peptic ulcer bleeding (P=0.02); furthermore, a tendency toward non-peptic ulcer bleeding with administration of H2RA was indicated, but it was not statistically significant (P=0.12). In conclusion, immunosuppressive agents were correlated with peptic ulcer bleeding and PPIs were effective at lowering the risk of peptic ulcer bleeding.

Stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) is considered standard of care in the majority of critically ill patients in the ICU. In this review, we will present the current evidence for the use of SUP in ICU patients, including data on the prevalence of gastrointestinal bleeding and the balance between benefits and harms of SUP.

RECENT FINDINGS

The prevalence of overt gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients is in the area of 5%. Consistent risk factors for gastrointestinal bleeding have been identified, but indications for SUP vary considerably. SUP is used in three out of four critically ill patients, most frequently in the form of proton pump inhibitors. A recent systematic review of SUP vs. placebo or no prophylaxis in critically ill patients highlights the lack of evidence supporting the use of SUP. Importantly, data suggest potential harm, including increased risk of nosocomial infections and cardiovascular events.

SUMMARY

The prevalence of gastrointestinal bleeding in critically ill patients in the ICU is low, the prognostic importance is ambiguous, and SUP is widely used. The balance between benefits and harms of SUP is unknown, and clinical equipoise exists. High-quality randomized controlled trials and systematic reviews assessing benefits and harms of SUP in ICU patients are highly warranted.

Effective and safe proton pump inhibitor therapy in acid-related diseases - A position paper addressing benefits and potential harms of acid suppression

BACKGROUND

The introduction of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) into clinical practice has revolutionized the management of acid-related diseases. Studies in primary care and emergency settings suggest that PPIs are frequently prescribed for inappropriate indications or for indications where their use offers little benefit. Inappropriate PPI use is a matter of great concern, especially in the elderly, who are often affected by multiple comorbidities and are taking multiple medications, and are thus at an increased risk of long-term PPI-related adverse outcomes as well as drug-to-drug interactions. Herein, we aim to review the current literature on PPI use and develop a position paper addressing the benefits and potential harms of acid suppression with the purpose of providing evidence-based guidelines on the appropriate use of these medications.

METHODS

The topics, identified by a Scientific Committee, were assigned to experts selected by three Italian Scientific Societies, who independently performed a systematic search of the relevant literature using Medline/PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane databases. Search outputs were distilled, paying more attention to systematic reviews and meta-analyses (where available) representing the best evidence. The draft prepared on each topic was circulated amongst all the members of the Scientific Committee. Each expert then provided her/his input to the writing, suggesting changes and the inclusion of new material and/or additional relevant references. The global recommendations were then thoroughly discussed in a specific meeting, refined with regard to both content and wording, and approved to obtain a summary of current evidence.

RESULTS

Twenty-five years after their introduction into clinical practice, PPIs remain the mainstay of the treatment of acid-related diseases, where their use in gastroesophageal reflux disease, eosinophilic esophagitis, Helicobacter pylori infection, peptic ulcer disease and bleeding as well as, and Zollinger-Ellison syndrome is appropriate. Prevention of gastroduodenal mucosal lesions (and symptoms) in patients taking non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) or antiplatelet therapies and carrying gastrointestinal risk factors also represents an appropriate indication. On the contrary, steroid use does not need any gastroprotection, unless combined with NSAID therapy. In dyspeptic patients with persisting symptoms, despite successful H. pylori eradication, short-term PPI treatment could be attempted. Finally, addition of PPIs to pancreatic enzyme replacement therapy in patients with refractory steatorrhea may be worthwhile.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, PPIs are irreplaceable drugs in the management of acid-related diseases. However, PPI treatment, as any kind of drug therapy, is not without risk of adverse effects. The overall benefits of therapy and improvement in quality of life significantly outweigh potential harms in most patients, but those without clear clinical indication are only exposed to the risks of PPI prescription. Adhering with evidence-based guidelines represents the only rational approach to effective and safe PPI therapy. Please see related Commentary: doi: 10.1186/s12916-016-0724-1 .

Adherence to stress-related mucosal damage prophylaxis guideline in patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit

Objective:

Concern about adverse effects of the inconsistent use of stress-related mucosal damage prophylaxis in intensive care unit (ICU) is increasing. Hence, this study was designed to prospectively evaluate the rate of inappropriate stress ulcer prophylaxis (SUP) administration upon ICU admission, at ICU discharge and determine the adherence to American Society of Health-System Pharmacists (ASHP) guideline during ICU stay.

Methods:

In this study, 200 patients were randomly selected from all ICU admissions during 9 months. Risk factors of stress ulcer were recorded daily during ICU stay and appropriateness of SUP administration was assessed according to the ASHP criteria.

Findings:

Of all 160 (80%) patients who received SUP, 44.4% did not have indication; and among 95 patients with an indication for SUP administration, 6.3% did not receive it upon ICU admission. Consequently, 77 (38.5%) of 200 patients received inappropriate prophylaxis on ICU admission. In addition, 53.5% of patients had appropriate adherence to ASHP guideline during all days of ICU stay (44% and 2.5% of patients received SUP more than 120% and <80% of appropriate SUP duration, respectively). Moreover, 81.2% were continued on inappropriate prophylaxis upon transfer from the ICU.

Conclusion:

We concluded that although SUP administration included both overutilization and underutilization in this ICU, but high prevalence of SUP overutilization caused unnecessary hospital costs, personal monetary burden, and may increase adverse drug reactions. Therefore, educating physicians and cooperation of clinical pharmacists regarding implementing standard protocols could improve patterns of SUP administration.