
Editorial
Select search scope: search across all journals or within the current journal

These medication errors have occurred in health care facilities at least once. They will happen again—perhaps where you work. Through education and alertness of personnel and procedural safeguards, they can be avoided. You should consider publishing accounts of errors in your newsletters and/or presenting them in your inservice training programs.
Your assistance is required to continue this feature. The reports described here were received through the USP Medication Errors Reporting Program (MERP), which is presented in cooperation with the Institute for Safe Medication Practices. If you have encountered medication errors and would like to report them, you may call USP toll-free, 24 hours a day, at 800-233-7767 (800-23-ERROR).
Any reports published by ISMP will be anonymous. Comments are also invited; the writers' names will be published if desired. ISMP may be contacted at the address shown below.
Errors, close calls, or hazardous conditions may be reported through the ISMP (www.ismp.org) or USP (www.usp.org) Web sites or communicated directly to ISMP by calling 800-FAIL-SAFE or via e-mail at
The purpose of this feature is to heighten awareness of specific adverse drug reactions (ADRs), discuss methods of prevention, and promote reporting of ADRs to the FDA's medWatch program (800-FDA-1088). If you have reported an interesting preventable ADR to medWatch, please consider sharing the account with our readers. Write to Dr. Shuster at ISMP, 1800 Byberry Road, Suite 810, Huntingdon Valley, PA 19006 (call 215-947-7797; fax 215-914-1492; e-mail:
The increasing complexity of cancer chemotherapy increases the requirement that pharmacists be familiar with these highly toxic agents. This column will review various issues related to preparation, dispensing, and administration of cancer chemotherapy, and review various agents, both commercially available and investigational, used to treat malignant diseases. Questions or suggestions for topics should be addressed to Dominic A. Solimando, Jr., President, Oncology Pharmacy Services, Inc., 4201 Wilson Blvd #110-545, Arlington, VA 22203, e-mail:
This feature examines the impact of pharmacologic interventions on the treatment of the critically ill patient — an area of health care that has become increasingly complex. Recent advances in drug therapy (including evolving and controversial data) for adult intensive-care-unit patients will be reviewed and assessed in terms of clinical, humanistic, and economic outcomes. Direct questions or comments to Sandra Kane-Gill, PharmD, MSc, at
This
The objective of this study was to assess the relationship between antibiotic exposure and subsequent
A retrospective, case-control study with data collected between October 1, 2005 and March 31, 2006 was conducted. Cases consisted of patients with a documented new onset of diarrhea occurring a minimum of 72 hours following admission to the hospital and accompanied by a positive
Prior antibiotic exposure was observed more frequently in these cases than in controls (
This study showed that prior antibiotic exposure is associated with increased incidence of subsequent CDAD. Specifically, third-generation cephalosporins were statistically associated with CDAD. Although results did not reach statistical significance, this study suggests that potential associations may exist between CDAD and prior exposure to antipseudomonal penicillins, cefepime, carbapenems, fluoroquinolones, and intravenous vancomycin.
Antimicrobial resistance can be tracked by several methods. The optimal application of surveillance strategies is an integral part in curbing the resistance epidemic.
The Antimicrobial Resistance Management (ARM) and Meropenem Yearly Susceptibility Test Information Collection (MYSTIC) programs are ongoing antibiotic surveillance studies with different methodologies. Our aim was to compare susceptibility data generated by each program to determine if the two methods produce similar results.
ARM is a Web-based, antibiogram-driven surveillance system, whereas MYSTIC tests individual bacterial isolates in accordance with Clinical Laboratory Standards Institute methods. We compared national susceptibility rates during 1999 to 2004 from ARM and MYSTIC for
Surveillance of antibiotic activity patterns can be performed confidently with either method discussed above. Attempts should be made to integrate results from different surveillance programs to optimize surveillance.
Each month, subscribers to
Through the cooperation of
This monthly feature will help readers keep current on new drugs, indications, dosage forms, and safety-related changes in labeling or use. Efforts have been made to ensure the accuracy of the information; however, if there are any questions, let us know at
This is the fourth in a six-part series on diversion of controlled substances in an acute health care setting. The six articles are meant to accompany the recommendations in the
This
