Yutian Bi

Background and aim: Infectious disease (ID) consultation can improve multidrug-resistant organism (MDRO) treatment outcomes. However, the impact of clinical pharmacists’ ID consultation on MDRO therapy, especially early initiation, has not been reported. In this study, we try to explore the impact of the pharmacist early active consultation (PEAC) on MDRO patient management.Methods: We conducted a prospective historical controlled study based on PEAC in MDRO patients. The retrospective control group was patients hospitalized 18 months before the PEAC initiation, and the prospective PEAC group was patients hospitalized 18 months after the PEAC initiation. Primary endpoint was 30-day all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes were MDRO clinical outcome, duration of antibiotic use, length of stay, antibiotic consumption and antibiotic costs. Further subgroup analysis of secondary outcomes was performed by the condition at admission, MDRO pathogenicity and MDRO clinical outcome.Results: 188 MDRO patients were included. After adjusting for potential predictors, PEAC reduced the 30-day all-cause mortality by 70% (HR 0.30, 95% CI 0.09–0.96, p = 0.042). PEAC group had clinical improvement than control group (89.47% vs. 65.59%, p < 0.001), especially in patients with non-severe clinical conditions at admission (98.41% vs. 70.18%, p < 0.001). However, no significant differences were found between groups in length of stay, antibiotics consumption, and antibiotics costs.Conclusion: Early active pharmacy ID consultation can reduce 30-day all-cause mortality and improve clinical outcomes in MDRO patients.

Background The aim of blood transfusion risk management is to improve the quality of blood products and to assure patient safety. We utilize failure mode and effect analysis (FMEA), a tool employed for evaluating risks and identifying preventive measures to reduce the risks in blood transfusion. Study Design and Methods The failure modes and effects occurring throughout the whole process of blood transfusion were studied. Each failure mode was evaluated using three scores: severity of effect (S), likelihood of occurrence (O), and probability of detection (D). Risk priority numbers (RPNs) were calculated by multiplying the S, O, and D scores. The plan‐do‐check‐act cycle was also used for continuous improvement. Results Analysis has showed that failure modes with the highest RPNs, and therefore the greatest risk, were insufficient preoperative assessment of the blood product requirement (RPN, 245), preparation time before infusion of more than 30 minutes (RPN, 240), blood transfusion reaction occurring during the transfusion process (RPN, 224), blood plasma abuse (RPN, 180), and insufficient and/or incorrect clinical information on request form (RPN, 126). After implementation of preventative measures and reassessment, a reduction in RPN was detected with each risk. The failure mode with the second highest RPN, namely, preparation time before infusion of more than 30 minutes, was shown in detail to prove the efficiency of this tool. Conclusions FMEA evaluation model is a useful tool in proactively analyzing and reducing the risks associated with the blood transfusion procedure.