Immediate Reduction in Hospital Pharmacy Costs with Intraoperative Restriction of Albumin Administration
Journal Title: Biomedical Journal of Scientific & Technical Research (BJSTR) - Year 2017, Vol 1, Issue 6
Abstract
Albumin has been used for fluid resuscitation in the OR and ICU, since 1940 [1]. Its usage gained prominence based on the classic descriptions of transvascular exchange by Earnest Starling who purported that colloids such as albumin should be more effective at increasing depleted intravascular volume due to their relative vascular membrane impermeability when compared to crystalloids such as saline [2]. It was not until 1998 that a systematic review by the Cochrane Injury Group Albumin Reviewers that the use of albumin for fluid resuscitation came under scrutiny [3]. In this first summary they described a 6 percent increase in mortality (relative risk 1.68, 95% confidence interval 1.28 to 2.23) in patients with hypovolemia, burns, and hypo-albuminemia who received albumin versus other fluids. This scrutiny lead to the landmark Saline versus Albumin Fluid Evaluation (SAFE) study published in the New England Journal of Medicine [4]. The SAFE study was a double blind randomized controlled trial that compared 4 percent albumin to 0.9 percent saline for fluid resuscitation in the ICU for a population of 6997 patients assigned to receive albumin or normal saline. This landmark study showed that when measuring primary outcomes over a 28-day period, albumin had no inherent advantages over saline in terms of mortality, length of stay, dialysis requirement, and mechanical ventilation duration. Moreover, The SAFE study investigators showed with subpopulation analysis that colloid fluid resuscitation was associated with a 19.6 percent increase in mortality in patients suffering from traumatic brain injury (relative risk, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.31 to 2.70; P<0.001)[5]. While critics of the SAFE study have concerns over the limitations of the 28-day observation period, they inevitably conclude the routine use of albumin for fluid resuscitation is not warranted for both the critically ill and for Intraoperative use [6,7]. Literature showing outcome associated benefits of albumin use is sparse and limited to specific patient subpopulations such as patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft or suffering from septic shock [1,3,4,7,8]. However, these studies are limited in scope only measuring superficial physiological metrics such as hemodynamics or comparing albumin exclusively to other colloids [7,8]. Methods Tampa General Hospital is a large multispecialty facility of 1080 beds on the west coast of Florida, with major services in trauma, transplant, and specialty surgery for all ages. Average daily surgeries regularly exceed 200 patients in 60 staffing locations. After cost analysis and hospital-wide discussions, a memorandum accepted by the Pharmacy and Therapeutic Committee on September 2016 was circulated throughout the anesthesia department stating all forms of albumin would be removed from department endorsed anesthesia carts and all future requests for albumin were to be made at the pharmacy counter recording the physician name and indication. Following this memo, a series of guidelines were distributed department wide, to describe possible medical indications suggesting use of albumin and allowing for restricted distribution upon request by the Attending Anesthesia Provider. A synopsis of these Indications is described in (Table 1).The rapid reduction in utilization was well received by providers in all anesthetic locations, as it was heralded and widely discussed weeks prior to implementation. Tracking of utilization and costper month are described in Figure 1, with a monthly summary and a 12 month follow up Table 2. Following restrictions on albumin administration, our institution was able to reduce average monthly albumin costs from $24,372 to $14,338 providing a potential annual savings of $120,000. After the first six months of the initiative, a slight increase in albumin utilization was noted resulting in a lower average monthly cost reduction than projected. This is possibly due to lack of continued monitoring and education, combined with employee turnover. However, this trend should be remedied with implementation of an education program for new employees and increased scrutiny for current employees to curb incorrect usage habits.
Authors and Affiliations
Devanand Mangar, Garrett Enten, Enrico Camporesi
Keywords
Related Articles
- EP ID EP578772
- DOI 10.26717/BJSTR.2017.01.000520
- Views 169
- Downloads 0
Agriculturally Important Microbiomes: Biodiversity and Multifarious PGP Attributes for Amelioration of Diverse Abiotic Stresses in Crops for Sustainable Agriculture
The Microbiomes from plant and different extreme environments have been reported and characterized for genotypic and multifarious functional attributes. The plant Microbiomes (ph...
Nutriepigenomics Advances into Personalized Nutrition
This review presents an omics systems perspective that presents an integrated approach to understanding the contribution of the genetic, epigenetic, metabolomic, and proteomic interactions under the influence of a dynami...
The Caspian Littoral Strip in Azerbaijan is concerned with the State of Ecology of Heavily Exposed Metals
The presented article considers the natural-geographic location of Absheron, analyzes the presence of heavy metals such as zinc, mercury, arsen, copper in soils and plants remoteness from sources of pollution. Also, the...
Low Molecular Weight Heparin as a Therapeutic Tool for Cancer; Special Emphasis on Breast Cancer
Cancer is a debilitating, life changing disease that not only affects patients but their families as well. Individuals who suffer through cancer constantly battle against the disease. There are several forms of cancer an...
Why is Tinnitus so annoying?
Animals have their hearing as a warning system for the first line of defence, which raises the alert. In humans, except from the basic innate “animal” reactions, we have our thoughts and feelings, with our sentiments and...