Impact of Pharmacy Technician-Centered Medication Reconciliation on Optimization of Antiretroviral Therapy and Opportunistic Infection Prophylaxis in Hospitalized Patients With HIV/AIDS

2013 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 428-433 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura A. Siemianowski ◽  
Sanchita Sen ◽  
Jomy M. George

Purpose: This study aimed to examine the role of a pharmacy technician-centered medication reconciliation (PTMR) program in optimization of medication therapy in hospitalized patients with HIV/AIDS. Methods: A chart review was conducted for all inpatients that had a medication reconciliation performed by the PTMR program. Adult patients with HIV and antiretroviral therapy (ART) and/or the opportunistic infection (OI) prophylaxis listed on the medication reconciliation form were included. The primary objective is to describe the (1) number and types of medication errors and (2) the percentage of patients who received appropriate ART. The secondary objective is a comparison of the number of medication errors between standard mediation reconciliation and a pharmacy-led program. Results: In the PTMR period, 55 admissions were evaluated. In all, 50% of the patients received appropriate ART. In 27of the 55 admissions, there were 49 combined ART and OI-related errors. The most common ART-related errors were drug–drug interactions. The incidence of ART-related medication errors that included drug–drug interactions and renal dosing adjustments were similar between the pre-PTMR and PTMR groups ( P = .0868). Of the 49 errors in the PTMR group, 18 were intervened by a medication reconciliation pharmacist. Conclusion: A PTMR program has a positive impact on optimizing ART and OI prophylaxis in patients with HIV/AIDS.

2016 ◽  
Vol 94 (4) ◽  
pp. 389-392 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Schatz ◽  
W. Guffey ◽  
M. Maccia ◽  
M. Templin ◽  
K. Rector

Medical Care ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 50 (11) ◽  
pp. 920-927 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christine U. Oramasionwu ◽  
Jim M. Koeller ◽  
Kenneth A. Lawson ◽  
Carolyn M. Brown ◽  
Gene D. Morse ◽  
...  

Blood ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 118 (21) ◽  
pp. 4210-4210
Author(s):  
James M Mikula ◽  
Lynn Weber ◽  
Katie Won

Abstract Abstract 4210 Introduction: Patients with HIV/AIDS are at high risk for developing oncologic diseases such as lymphomas. Since the mid-1990s, the implementation of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART) has decreased the incidence of AIDS-defining malignancies; however, the advent of chronic, controlled HIV infection has increased the incidence of non-AIDS-defining malignancies such as Hodgkin Lymphoma (HL). Mortality from HL and non-Hodgkin Lymphoma (NHL) has decreased with the addition of cART to traditional and dose-adjusted chemotherapy regimens. Many antiretroviral agents affect the metabolism of antineoplastic agents via cytochrome P450 interactions. Possible complications include decreased efficacy of antineoplastic agents and increased toxicity of either or both classes of drugs. Protease inhibitors, especially ritonavir, are potent CYP3A4 inhibitors and therefore have the potential to significantly increase toxicity of multiple antineoplastic agents. Excess neutropenia has been observed in prospective studies in concomitantly treated patients when protease inhibitors are included in cART. Despite this, there is currently no clear evidence to guide clinicians on how to dose pharmacologic agents to treat HIV/AIDS and lymphoma simultaneously. The purpose of this retrospective chart review was to evaluate the significance of the drug-drug interactions experienced by HIV/AIDS patients who were treated with antiretroviral agents and high-intensity chemotherapy for lymphoma. Methods: All patients treated at Hennepin County Medical Center from 1999–2010 were screened for the diagnoses of lymphoma and HIV/AIDS. Patients were included if they met the following criteria: age greater than 18 years; diagnosis of HIV or AIDS; diagnosis of lymphoma; and treatment with an antineoplastic regimen for lymphoma with concomitant antiretroviral therapy. Electronic medical records were systematically reviewed for patient demographics, CD4 counts, viral loads, complete blood counts, complete metabolic panels, planned chemotherapy regimens, and chemotherapy administration and discontinuation. Chemotherapy adverse drug reactions (ADRs) were recorded and graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0. Medication profiles for each patient were screened for potential drug interactions. The primary outcomes were incidence of chemotherapy interruptions or changes due to toxicity and the time to such regimen changes. The secondary outcomes were the number of ADRs reported and the management of these events. Results: A total of 114 patients were identified as having both an HIV/AIDS diagnosis and an oncologic diagnosis, 31 of which were lymphomas. Eleven of the 31 patients received concomitant antiretroviral therapy and had medical records available for review, encompassing 7 chemotherapy regimens and 12 chemotherapy courses. Median age was 46 years and 9 of the patients were male. All chemotherapy courses were subject to potential drug-drug interactions with patients' cART with 10 courses potentially affected by the use of protease inhibitors in 9 patients. Delay or interruption due to chemotherapy toxicity occurred in 11 of 12 chemotherapy courses affecting 10 patients as early as before the completion of their first chemotherapy cycle and as late as their last chemotherapy cycle. The 11 patients experienced a total of 124 documented ADRs (16 grade III-V), and 10 patients had a total of 20 emergency department visits. Eight patients required hospitalization 16 times for management of their ADRs. One patient with Castleman disease died of cytokine release syndrome in spite of chemotherapy. Conclusion: Chemotherapy interruptions and delays may be common in the setting of concomitant antineoplastic and antiretroviral therapy for treatment of lymphoma and HIV/AIDS. Although most chemotherapy ADRs were grade I or II, concomitant cART may have contributed to the increased hospitalization rate of these patients. Further investigation is required to determine if risk-mitigation strategies such as chemotherapy dose-reduction, avoidance of cART regimens which include protease inhibitors, and therapeutic drug monitoring should be implemented. Disclosures: No relevant conflicts of interest to declare.


2016 ◽  
Vol 28 (5) ◽  
pp. 447-458 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marwan M Azar ◽  
Maricar F Malinis ◽  
J Moss ◽  
Richard N Formica ◽  
Merceditas S Villanueva

In the era of antiretroviral therapy, people living with HIV/AIDS live longer and are subject to co-morbidities that affect the general population, such as chronic kidney disease. An increasing number of people living with HIV/AIDS with end-stage renal disease are candidates for renal transplantation. Prior experience demonstrated that HIV-positive renal transplant recipients had acceptable survival but graft survival was decreased and rejection rates were increased, possibly due to suboptimal management of immunosuppressive medications in the face of drug interactions with antiretroviral therapy, particularly protease inhibitors and non-nucleoside reverse transcriptase inhibitors. Integrase strand transferase inhibitors are advantageous since they avoid drug–drug interactions with immunosuppressive drugs such as calcineurin inhibitors. We report clinical outcomes of 12 HIV-positive patients who underwent 13 kidney transplantations at our institution between 2000 and 2015. Cumulative survival was 75%, one-year and three-year survival were 100% and 63%. Integrase strand transferase inhibitor-based regimens were used in nine patients, of which eight survived. In patients on integrase strand transferase inhibitor, there was 100% graft survival and two had allograft rejection. In contrast, graft failure occurred in three patients on non-integrase strand transferase inhibitor-based regimens. Based on our study findings and on previously published data, we conclude that integrase strand transferase inhibitor-based therapy, preferably instituted prior to transplantation, is the preferred antiretroviral regimen in HIV-positive renal transplantation.


2010 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 222-223 ◽  
Author(s):  
Megan A Corrigan ◽  
Kendra M Atkinson ◽  
Beverly E Sha ◽  
Christopher W Crank

2017 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 147
Author(s):  
Mardia Mardia ◽  
Riris Andono Ahmad ◽  
Bambang Sigit Riyanto

Purpose: This study aimed to determine the quality of life among people living with HIV/AIDS based on the criteria for diagnosis and other factors.Methods: This study was conducted in the VCT clinic hospital of Dr. Moewardi. The population was HIV-positive patients with antiretroviral therapy. Data collection conducted through medical records and interview to patients. Results: Out of a total of 89 respondents, 66.29% were males and 71.91% were aged between 26-45 years. We found significant correlations for diagnosis of HIV/AIDS, opportunistic infections, time since HIV diagnosis, duration of ARV therapy, social support, modes of transport, sex, age, and marital status with the quality of life. Multivariate analysis obtained by each variable showed the strongest association with the quality of life was time since diagnosis, social support and duration of ARV therapy. Conclusion: The quality of life was better for those who have been diagnosed with HIV/AIDS ≥ 32 months, with social support, and who have been undergoing antiretroviral therapy ≥ 29 months. Improved counseling in the early days of ARV therapy is necessary to always maintain the treatment and provide support for their social life.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document