Clinical pharmacy
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparison of heparin and 0.9% sodium chloride injection in the maintenance of indwelling intermittent i.v. devices.
Heparin sodium 10 units/mL was compared with 0.9% sodium chloride injection as a flush solution for indwelling intermittent i.v. devices, or i.v. locks (IVLs), in a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. The heparin and 0.9% sodium chloride injections were prepared in the pharmacy using aseptic technique. Most of the IVLs were inserted by an i.v. therapy team member. ⋯ The groups were well matched, except that the sodium chloride group received more vancomycin and dextrose-containing i.v. solutions, while the heparin group received more penicillins. There was no significant difference in the incidence of phlebitis or lost patency between the groups. When locks through which vancomycin, penicillins, and dextrose-containing i.v. solutions were administered were excluded, there was still no significant difference between the groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Efficacy of patient-controlled versus conventional analgesia for postoperative pain.
Patient-controlled i.v. administration and intramuscular administration of morphine sulfate were compared in a crossover study to determine their relative effectiveness in relieving postoperative pain. Twenty adult patients scheduled for abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to one of two groups; one group received i.v. morphine sulfate for 24 hours using a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device, after which they were given morphine sulfate i.m. for 24 hours. The treatment order was reversed for the other group. ⋯ No significant differences in amount of narcotic used, respiratory rate, nausea and vomiting, or levels of activity or sedation were noted for the two regimens. Patients' rankings of the two treatment modes did not differ significantly, but a majority of patients indicated a preference for future use of PCA. In these postoperative patients, administration of i.v. morphine sulfate by PCA was as safe as i.m. administration and possibly more effective in relieving pain.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Twice-daily moxalactam versus gentamicin and clindamycin in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma.
The effectiveness and total costs of moxalactam administered every 12 hours versus a combination of gentamicin and clindamycin for prophylactic use in patients with penetrating abdominal trauma were compared. Fifty patients scheduled for laparotomy after penetrating abdominal wounds were randomly assigned to receive either clindamycin phosphate 600 mg every six hours with gentamicin (as the sulfate salt) 3-5 mg/kg/day in three divided doses or moxalactam disodium 2 g every 12 hours. Therapy was begun preoperatively and continued for a minimum of three days in patients without hollow-organ injury and five days in patients with hollow-organ injury; total duration of therapy could not exceed four weeks. ⋯ No direct toxic effects of moxalactam or gentamicin-clindamycin were seen; transient abnormalities in blood-coagulation tests or serum creatinine concentration occurred in several patients. Although mean drug costs per patient for moxalactam and gentamicin-clindamycin were similar, the mean cost of therapy per patient was $125.23 higher for the combination regimen than for moxalactam when laboratory, personnel-time, and supply costs were added to drug costs. Moxalactam given every 12 hours was a safe and effective alternative to the combination of gentamicin and clindamycin for preventive use in the study patients with penetrating abdominal trauma.
-
The mechanism of action, pharmacokinetics, and use of flumazenil in benzodiazepine overdose, as well as in the management of other disease states, are reviewed. Flumazenil interacts at the central benzodiazepine receptor to antagonize or reverse the behavioral, neurologic, and electrophysiologic effects of benzodiazepine agonists and inverse agonists. Flumazenil has been studied for a variety of indications, including as an antidote to benzodiazepine overdose and for awakening of comatose patients, reversal of sedation after surgery and in critically ill patients, and management of hepatic encephalopathy. ⋯ Hepatic dysfunction results in a substantial change in the pharmacokinetic profile of flumazenil; therefore, dosage adjustment may be necessary in patients with hepatic dysfunction or in those receiving medications that alter flumazenil metabolism. Flumazenil has been shown to reverse sedation caused by intoxication with benzodiazepines alone or benzodiazepines in combination with other agents, but it should not be used when cyclic antidepressant intoxication is suspected. It may be beneficial after surgery when benzodiazepines have been used as part of anesthesia and after a diagnostic or surgical procedure when assessment of CNS function is necessary.
-
Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Double-blind crossover trial of droperidol, metoclopramide, and prochlorperazine as antiemetics in cisplatin therapy.
Droperidol, metoclopramide, and prochlorperazine were compared in a double-blind crossover trial to determine their relative effectiveness in preventing and controlling the nausea and vomiting caused by cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. Twenty-five patients receiving cisplatin-containing chemotherapy for various malignancies were entered into this trial with 14 patients completing the three-drug randomization sequence. This was the patient's first exposure to cisplatin. ⋯ There was a significant difference in number of emetic episodes demonstrating antiemetic superiority of metoclopramide over both droperidol and prochlorperazine. For these 14 patients completing the trial, eight preferred metoclopramide, two preferred prochlorperazine, one preferred droperidol, and three had no preference. At the doses used in this study, the antiemetic efficacy of metoclopramide was superior to either droperidol or prochlorperazine.