Appropriateness of gentamicin therapeutic drug monitoring at a Middle Eastern tertiary hospital setting: a retrospective evaluation and quality audit.

IF 3.3 Q1 HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Pub Date : 2024-07-12 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1080/20523211.2024.2375753
Fatima Khalifa Al-Sulaiti, Dania Alkhiyami, Eman Zeyad I Elmekaty, Ahmed Awaisu, Nadir Kheir, Ahmed El-Zubair, Hend Khalifa Al-Sulaiti
{"title":"Appropriateness of gentamicin therapeutic drug monitoring at a Middle Eastern tertiary hospital setting: a retrospective evaluation and quality audit.","authors":"Fatima Khalifa Al-Sulaiti, Dania Alkhiyami, Eman Zeyad I Elmekaty, Ahmed Awaisu, Nadir Kheir, Ahmed El-Zubair, Hend Khalifa Al-Sulaiti","doi":"10.1080/20523211.2024.2375753","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>The use of gentamicin in the treatment of infectious diseases requires frequent monitoring to attain the best treatment outcomes.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of gentamicin therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) at a tertiary care hospital in Qatar.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A one-year quantitative retrospective chart review of all gentamicin TDM records was conducted. Evidence-based criteria were applied to evaluate the appropriateness of gentamicin TDM in terms of indication, sampling times, and post-analytical actions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Out of 59 captured gentamicin TDM records, 58 gentamicin samples were eligible for evaluation. Overall, gentamicin TDM appropriateness was achieved in 50% (<i>n</i> = 29) of the evaluated records. However, 12% (<i>n</i> = 7) of gentamicin drug concentrations were below the assay quantification limits or were not sampled appropriately. Inappropriate post-analytical actions (22.4%, <i>n</i> = 13) and inappropriate sampling times (44.8%, <i>n</i> = 26) were recorded. Most of the gentamicin blood samples (<i>n</i> = 43; 74.2%) were taken appropriately at steady-state. Inappropriate sampling time relative to the last dose was captured in 31% (<i>n</i> = 18) of the cases. Although 27.6% (<i>n</i> = 16) of gentamicin concentrations were non-therapeutic, continuing gentamicin dosing without adjustment was the most frequent post-analytical action (69.8%, <i>n</i> = 37). Gentamicin dose regimen continuations, dose regimen decreases and dose regimen discontinuations were inappropriately applied in 27% (<i>n</i> = 10), 25% (<i>n</i> = 2) and 14% (<i>n</i> = 1) of the times, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Suboptimal gentamicin TDM practices exist in relation to sampling time and post-analytical actions. Studies exploring setting-specific reasons behind inappropriate TDM practices and methods of its optimisation are needed.</p>","PeriodicalId":16740,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11249166/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20523211.2024.2375753","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH POLICY & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: The use of gentamicin in the treatment of infectious diseases requires frequent monitoring to attain the best treatment outcomes.

Objective: This study aimed to evaluate the appropriateness of gentamicin therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) at a tertiary care hospital in Qatar.

Methods: A one-year quantitative retrospective chart review of all gentamicin TDM records was conducted. Evidence-based criteria were applied to evaluate the appropriateness of gentamicin TDM in terms of indication, sampling times, and post-analytical actions.

Results: Out of 59 captured gentamicin TDM records, 58 gentamicin samples were eligible for evaluation. Overall, gentamicin TDM appropriateness was achieved in 50% (n = 29) of the evaluated records. However, 12% (n = 7) of gentamicin drug concentrations were below the assay quantification limits or were not sampled appropriately. Inappropriate post-analytical actions (22.4%, n = 13) and inappropriate sampling times (44.8%, n = 26) were recorded. Most of the gentamicin blood samples (n = 43; 74.2%) were taken appropriately at steady-state. Inappropriate sampling time relative to the last dose was captured in 31% (n = 18) of the cases. Although 27.6% (n = 16) of gentamicin concentrations were non-therapeutic, continuing gentamicin dosing without adjustment was the most frequent post-analytical action (69.8%, n = 37). Gentamicin dose regimen continuations, dose regimen decreases and dose regimen discontinuations were inappropriately applied in 27% (n = 10), 25% (n = 2) and 14% (n = 1) of the times, respectively.

Conclusion: Suboptimal gentamicin TDM practices exist in relation to sampling time and post-analytical actions. Studies exploring setting-specific reasons behind inappropriate TDM practices and methods of its optimisation are needed.

中东一家三级医院庆大霉素治疗药物监测的适当性:回顾性评估和质量审计。
简介使用庆大霉素治疗感染性疾病需要经常进行监测,以获得最佳治疗效果:本研究旨在评估卡塔尔一家三级医院庆大霉素治疗药物监测(TDM)的适当性:方法:对所有庆大霉素治疗药物监测记录进行为期一年的定量回顾性病历审查。方法:对所有庆大霉素 TDM 记录进行为期一年的定量回顾性病历审查,采用循证标准评估庆大霉素 TDM 在适应症、采样时间和分析后行动方面的适当性:结果:在 59 份采集的庆大霉素 TDM 记录中,有 58 份庆大霉素样本符合评估条件。总体而言,50%(29 份)的评估记录符合庆大霉素 TDM 要求。然而,12%(n = 7)的庆大霉素药物浓度低于检测定量限或采样不当。不恰当的分析后操作(22.4%,n = 13)和不恰当的采样时间(44.8%,n = 26)也被记录在案。大多数庆大霉素血样(n = 43;74.2%)在稳态时采样适当。31%的病例(n = 18)采样时间与最后一次用药时间不符。虽然有 27.6%(16 例)的庆大霉素浓度不符合治疗要求,但分析后最常见的做法是继续使用庆大霉素而不进行调整(69.8%,37 例)。继续使用庆大霉素剂量方案、减少剂量方案和中止剂量方案的比例分别为 27%(10 人)、25%(2 人)和 14%(1 人):结论:庆大霉素 TDM 在采样时间和分析后操作方面存在不足。需要对不恰当的 TDM 操作背后的特定原因及其优化方法进行研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice
Journal of Pharmaceutical Policy and Practice Health Professions-Pharmacy
CiteScore
4.70
自引率
9.50%
发文量
81
审稿时长
14 weeks
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信